Upload
others
View
5
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Univers
ity of
Cap
e Tow
n
i
Evaluating the impacts of a state led relocation project on
beneficiaries’ housing satisfactions: Pelican Parkas a Case Study
by
Nigel Mashazhu
Dissertation presented as part fulfilment of the degree of Masters of City and Regional Planning
In the School of Architecture, Planning and Geomatics
University of Cape Town
Supervisor: Associate Professor Tanja Winkler
November 2016
The copyright of this thesis vests in the author. No quotation from it or information derived from it is to be published without full acknowledgement of the source. The thesis is to be used for private study or non-commercial research purposes only.
Published by the University of Cape Town (UCT) in terms of the non-exclusive license granted to UCT by the author.
Univers
ity of
Cap
e Tow
n
ii
Declaration
The candidate is required to sign a declaration stating:
" I hereby:
(a) grant the University free license to reproduce the above thesis in whole or in
part, for the purpose of research;
(b) declare that:
(i) the above thesis is my own unaided work, both in conception and execution,
and that apart from the normal guidance of my supervisor, I have received no
assistance apart from that stated below;
(ii) except as stated below, neither the substance or any part of the thesis has
been submitted in the past, or is being, or is to be submitted for a degree in
the University or any other University.
(iii) I am now presenting the thesis for examination the thesis for examination for
the Degree of Master of City and Regional Planning.”
Signature
iii
Abstract
The dissertation evaluates the impacts of state relocation projects on
beneficiaries housing satisfaction. The government embarks on relocation
projects as a means to address massive housing backlog. One of the main
drawbacks with relocation projects is locational disadvantage. The broad
aim of this dissertation is to evaluate the impacts of a state led relocation
project on beneficiary housing satisfaction. The research method employed
in the study was the case study based on a state project used for the
evaluation process. In order to evaluate beneficiary housing satisfaction, I set
an impact assessment criteria specifically (1) enabling mobility; (2) enabling
choice; (3) meeting economic needs; (4) meeting physical needs (5)
meeting social needs and enabling access to public services; (6); enabling
security of tenure; and (7) environmental resilience.
The study findings revealed that beneficiaries were highly dissatisfied with
their housing. The main driving factor to dissatisfaction was unfavourable
location of the settlement which resulted in accessibility challenges to Cape
Town central business district, socio-economic opportunities and transport.
The relocation process impacted greatly on livelihood strategies of
beneficiaries. Beneficiary aspirations were not met. The contribution of the
study is not only to unveil the mismatch in state housing projects but also to
ensure that future state assisted projects are delivered on quality approach
as opposed to quantity approach.
iv
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my gratitude to God for granting me this opportunity to
study and the gift of life.
Secondly I want to thank my supervisor Associate Professor Tanja Winkler for
her guidance and patience in ensuring that I successfully complete my
research. Also I want to thank Nobukosi Ngwenya for her support during this
journey.
Very special thanks to my parents and siblings who supported me financially
and emotionally. I could have not asked for a better family. Words cannot
express my gratitude for all your support.
v
List of Acronyms
Breaking New Ground BNG
Central Business District CBD
City of Cape Town CoCT
Comprehensive Housing Plan CHP
Department of Human Settlements DHS
Finance-linked Individual Subsidy Programme FLISP
Integrated Residential Development Programme the IRDP
Municipal Systems Act MSA
National Home Builders Registration Council NHBRC
Nongovernmental organisations NGO
Power Group Construction PGC
South African Police Service SAPS
United Nations UN
University of Cape Town UCT
vi
Table of Contents
Declaration .............................................................................................................................................. ii
Abstract .................................................................................................................................................. iii
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................ iv
List of Acronyms ...................................................................................................................................... v
List of Tables .......................................................................................................................................... ix
List of Figures ......................................................................................................................................... ix
List of Appendixes .................................................................................................................................. ix
Chapter 1: Background and Context ................................................................................................... 1
1. 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1
1.2. The background to the study ....................................................................................................... 3
1.3. Identifying the problem under study ........................................................................................... 5
1.4. Establishing the aim of study ....................................................................................................... 5
1.5. Establishing the Main research question ..................................................................................... 6
1.6. Introducing the research methods .............................................................................................. 6
1.7. The Structure of the dissertation ................................................................................................. 6
1.8. Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 7
Chapter 2: Literature Review .................................................................................................................. 8
2.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 8
2.2. Housing satisfaction ..................................................................................................................... 9
2.2.1. Adequate housing ............................................................................................................... 10
2.2.2. Assessing Housing Satisfaction ........................................................................................... 11
2.3. Enabling mobility ....................................................................................................................... 11
2.3.1. Enabling choice via accessibility, legibility and permeability .............................................. 12
2.4. Diversity ..................................................................................................................................... 14
2.4.1. Diversity of land uses .......................................................................................................... 14
2.4.2. Diversity of Population ........................................................................................................ 15
2. 5. Meeting economic needs .......................................................................................................... 16
2.5.1. Housing affordability ........................................................................................................... 17
2.6. Physical Attributes of the Housing ............................................................................................. 18
2.6.1. Location ............................................................................................................................... 20
2. 6.2. House Size .......................................................................................................................... 20
2.6.3. Architectural quality ........................................................................................................... 21
2.6.4. Distinctive character ........................................................................................................... 21
2.7. Meeting social needs and enabling access to public services ................................................... 22
vii
2.7.1. Sense of belonging .............................................................................................................. 23
2.7.2. Safety .................................................................................................................................. 24
2.7.3. Sense of community............................................................................................................ 24
2.7.4. Beneficiary involvement in project development............................................................... 25
2.7.5. Enabling access to public services. ...................................................................................... 25
2.7.6. Enabling access to basic services ........................................................................................ 26
2.8. Security of tenure ...................................................................................................................... 28
2.9. Environmental resilience ........................................................................................................... 29
2.10. Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 29
Chapter 3: Research Methods .............................................................................................................. 32
3.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 32
3.2. Research methods ..................................................................................................................... 32
3.2.1. The case study method ....................................................................................................... 32
3.3. Research Techniques ................................................................................................................. 35
3.3.1. Observation ......................................................................................................................... 35
3.3.2. Individual Semi-structured, in-depth interviews ................................................................ 37
3.3. Triangulation .............................................................................................................................. 38
3.3.1. Validity and Reliability ......................................................................................................... 38
3.3.2. Reflexivity ............................................................................................................................ 39
3.4. Sampling Procedures ................................................................................................................. 39
3.4.1. Socio-economic Profile of Pelican Park respondents ......................................................... 40
3.5. Ethical Considerations ................................................................................................................ 41
3.6 Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 42
3.7. Conclusion .................................................................................................................................. 42
Chapter 4: Findings ............................................................................................................................... 43
4.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 43
4.2. Background: Pelican Park Housing Project ................................................................................ 44
4.2.1 The Pelican Park Housing Project: Conceptualised as a Mixed-use, Mixed-Income
Neighbourhood ............................................................................................................................. 47
4.2.2. BNG housing ........................................................................................................................ 48
4.2.3. Gap Housing ........................................................................................................................ 49
4.2.4. Market housing ................................................................................................................... 50
4.3. Evaluating Pelican Park based on criteria for beneficiary satisfaction ...................................... 51
4.3.1. Enabling mobility ................................................................................................................ 51
4.3.2. Diversity .............................................................................................................................. 55
4.3.3. Meeting economic needs .................................................................................................... 57
viii
4.3.4. Meeting physical needs ...................................................................................................... 64
4.3.5. Meeting social needs and enabling access to public services ............................................ 69
4.3.7. Security of tenure ............................................................................................................... 67
4.3.8. Environmental resilience .................................................................................................... 68
4.4. Conclusion .................................................................................................................................. 69
Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations ................................................................................... 72
5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 72
5.2. Answers to the research questions according to their themes ................................................. 73
5.2.1. Enabling mobility ................................................................................................................ 73
5.2.2. Diversity .............................................................................................................................. 74
5.2.3. Meeting economic needs .................................................................................................... 74
5.2.4. Meeting physical needs ...................................................................................................... 75
5.2.5. Meeting social needs and enabling access to public services ............................................ 75
5.2.6. Enabling security of tenure ................................................................................................. 77
5.2.7. Environmental resilience .................................................................................................... 77
5.3. Recommendations ..................................................................................................................... 78
5.3.1. Recommendations for social needs .................................................................................... 78
5.3.2. Recommendations for physical attributes .......................................................................... 79
5.3.3. Recommendation for economic needs ............................................................................... 80
5.3.4. The extent to which this dissertation achieves its purpose ................................................ 81
5.4. Limitations to the study ............................................................................................................. 82
5.5. Reflections.................................................................................................................................. 83
5.6. Conclusion .................................................................................................................................. 84
Reference List ........................................................................................................................................ 86
ix
List of Tables
Table 2.1 summary of the criteria for assessing the Pelican Park case 30
Table 4.1 summary of the criteria for assessing the Pelican Park case 70
List of Figures
Figure4.1: Adjacent neighbourhoods’ 44
Figure 4.2: Pelican Park in Cape Town 45
Figure 4.3: Sub council 19 46
Figure 4.4: BNG housing 49
Figure 4.5: Gap Housing 50
Figure 4.6: Market housing 51
Figure 4.7 Home Enterprises 63
Figure 4.8: Damp Walls 65
Figure 4.9: Cracked Walls 66
List of Appendixes
Appendix 1: application for approval ethics in research (EiR) projects 103
Appendix 2: Information sheet and consent form 104
Appendix 3: Information sheet and consent form 105
Appendix 4: Key Informants’ Semi-structured interview question 106
1
Chapter 1: Background and Context
1. 1 Introduction
The provision of housing for the urban poor remains a major challenge for the
South African government (RSA, Breaking New Ground, 2004). As such,
'housing relocation projects' are one of a number of approaches adopted by
the state to deliver housing to the urban poor. This study emerges from the
author’s interest in housing delivery programmes in general, and from an
interest in the impact of 'housing relocation projects' on occupiers in
particular. This study also emerges from a review of various scholars' work in
which they suggest that relocation projects have failed to transform the
historical characteristics of South African human settlements (Adebayo, 2000;
Verster, 2005; Huchzermeyer, 2011; Thwala & Aigbavboa, 2012). Scholars also
argue that state assisted relocation projects are located on urban peripheries
(far from public services and job opportunities), and that relocated housing
units are often of a poor quality (Adebayo, 2000; Charlton and Kihato, 2006).
For these scholars, housing relocation projects fail to adequately address the
needs and aspirations of relocated beneficiaries. Yet, and in accordance
with the state, the broad objective of the 'housing relocation project' is to
improve access to basic services, transform communities, facilitate local
economic development and improve relocated residents' lives (RSA,
Breaking New Ground, 2004). This study aims to critically assess these
conflicting standpoints by learning from beneficiaries of the Pelican Park
housing relocation project. This study also seeks to understand occupiers’
satisfaction of their new homes for the purpose of contributing to the
literature on sustainable human settlements in South Africa.
Galster and Hesser (1987) conceptualised housing satisfaction as a variable,
reflecting the gap between a household’s actual and desired housing
situation. Michelson (1977), in turn, maintains that residential satisfaction can
be viewed from three facets, namely: Mobility and choice; needs; and
2
residents' behaviour within their environment. Vliet (1998) agrees with
Michelson, but goes on to state that housing satisfaction needs to meet the
following criteria: (i) The economic needs of beneficiaries; (ii) the physical
settings (the size of the dwelling unit, building materials, location and layout
of houses); (iii) access to basic services; (iv) good quality of building materials;
(v) secure tenure; (vi) good location; (vii) access to educational, health and
recreational facilities; and (viii) promoting and maintaining social networks
and social cohesion. Collectively, these satisfaction criteria, or attributes of
measurement, are grouped into four categories of sustainable human
settlements: Social aspects; environmental aspects; economic aspects; and
physical aspects (UN-Habitat, 2012; Galster and Hesser, 1981; Rogers and
Nikkel 1979; Campbell et al. 1976; Morris and Winter 1976). While it may be
argued that these criteria are, somewhat, dated, they, nevertheless, serve as
useful assessment criteria for the purpose of this study. A discussion is
presented in Chapter 2 on how a more nuanced and critical employment of
these assessment criteria will be used for the purpose of evaluating residents'
satisfactions of Pelican Park. It should also be mentioned at this juncture that
some of the literature presented in Chapter 2 is based on empirical evidence
from the global North.
The purpose of this introductory chapter is to present the problem under
investigation as well as the main research question of the study. Before doing
so, the problem under investigation needs to be contextualised. This
contextualisation takes place in section 1.2, which, in turn, sets up the
overarching aim of my research. Thereafter the main research question is
presented. I have already alluded to the case study area of this research,
and I have briefly discussed the assessment criteria used to undertake this
study. These criteria will be further discussed in the next chapter. Chapter 2
also entails a critical review of the relevant literature for the purpose of
establishing subsidiary research questions.
3
1.2. The background to the study
The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, (hereinafter referred to
as 'the Constitution') is the founding document for the provisioning of housing
in South Africa. Section 26(1) (2) of the Constitution states that “access to
adequate housing” is every citizen’s right. This means that the government is
mandated to implement laws, programmes and other initiatives necessary to
ensure the progressive realisation of this right (Nyelete, 2010). The Breaking
New Ground (BNG) policy is but one such an initiative, which is aimed at
providing, well-located and affordable shelter for all. This policy builds on the
White Paper on Housing (1994; 1997; 2010) and adds the imperative of
ensuring that human settlements are sustainable, habitable and affordable
(RSA, Department of Human Settlements [DHS], 2010). According to the
Breaking New Ground (BNG) policy (2004:11), sustainable human settlements
are a well-managed balanced entity in which economic growth and social
development can carry the capacity of the natural systems in which people
can depend. This leads to job creation, wealth, sustainable development,
poverty alleviation and social equity.
State relocation projects are part of an attempt by the state to address the
ongoing growth of informal settlements in cities across the country. After
relocated houses have been occupied, a post-beneficiary occupancy
evaluation is supposed to take place in order to establish if, and how,
beneficiaries' needs are met (Watson, 2003). Such an evaluation, however,
does not always take place. When it does take place, criteria used to
evaluate beneficiaries' satisfaction tend to focus on quantifiable outcomes
alone (Charlton and Kihato, 2006). A more nuanced and qualitative
assessment of relocated residents' satisfaction is thus needed. This is the
purpose of my research.
Relocation is defined as a process whereby a community’s housing, assets,
and public infrastructure are rebuilt in another location (Jha, 2010).
Relocation is sometimes perceived to be the best, or only, option after
residents' current housing locations are presumed to be uninhabitable.
4
However, relocation is often not the best, or only, solution. Finding adequate
sites for relocating affected communities can be an enormous challenge
(Jha, 2010). New sites almost always destroys existing social networks and
livelihood strategies. They tend to break-up and fragment communities,
thereby dramatically reducing residents' earning capacities, while
interrupting children’s schooling activities (Charlton and Kihato, 2006;
Huchzermeyer, 2011; Jha, 2010). Furthermore, new sites tend to be further
from city centres, and, as such, residents' transportation costs are increased.
They create more anxiety for residents, and beneficiaries tend to respond to
such anxieties by migrating back to informal settlements (Charlton, 2014). In
sum, Jha (2010) argues that state relocation projects serve merely to increase
poverty (Jha, 2010). This claim is assessed by means of this research.
Additionally, and for the purpose of this research, 'housing' is conceptualised
as more than a mere structure to live in. As such, 'housing' needs to include
access to urban infrastructure, efficient public transportation networks, public
services, schools, health care facilities, retail facilities, amenities, community
and recreational facilities, and economic opportunities; as well as
opportunities to establish social networks (Inah et al, 2014). Above all else,
such a conceptualisation calls for minimal, if any, disruptions to the lives of
residents who are supposed to benefit from relocation projects.
The motivation for this study is borne from the fact that since the inception of
post-apartheid housing policies, there has been limited research on the post
occupation evaluation (Lu, 1999; Thwala and Aigbavboa, 2012). Yet, as
argued by Thwala and Aigbavboa (2012), such research is vitally important if
we hope enable more just and equitable cities. Pelican Park in Cape Town
was conceptualised, planned in 2007 and implemented by the City of Cape
Town in 2012 as a relocation project. It therefore serves as an excellent case
study to begin to understand relocated residents' housing satisfaction, since
sufficient time has passed to evaluate their housing satisfaction.
5
Discussions presented thus far are suggestive of the identified problems under
study. These will be summarised in the next section before turning to the aims
of this research.
1.3. Identifying the problem under study
Ongoing inward migration to urban areas, as well as internal population
growth, results in unplanned informal settlements and the rushed delivery of
housing. Since 1994, low-income housing programmes have entailed, for the
most part building dormitory settlements on urban peripheries, which in itself
presents a myriad of environmental, social, economic and political concerns.
Furthermore, as discussed in section 1.2, various problems are associated with
state assisted relocation projects. In a report compiled by the National
Department of Human Settlements titled ‘United Nations commission for
sustainable development twelfth session’, the Department demonstrates a
growing concern regarding the sustainability of housing programmes
(Ramashamole, 2010).
Problems with relocation projects in particular include: (i) New houses and
infrastructure are of a poor quality, are rapidly deteriorating and require
ongoing maintenance; (ii) new housing developments continue to place the
poor in segregated 'ghettos' on urban peripheries; ,(iii) occupants dislike the
model of housing used, and would prefer larger houses; (iv) new
developments include increases in vehicular traffic caused by urban sprawl
(v) beneficiaries often sell or rent out their allocated houses that they
acquired through the subsidy scheme; and (vi) many beneficiaries, move
back to informal settlements that are closer to economic activities (Charlton
and Kihato, 2006; Thwala and Aigbavboa, 2012). It is thus clear that the
performance of relocation projects remains a major concern. For this reason,
a deeper, and more nuanced assessment of housing satisfaction is needed.
1.4. Establishing the aim of study
The overarching aim of this study is to evaluate the impacts of a state-led
relocation project on beneficiaries’ housing satisfactions. Assessment criteria
6
used to evaluate this impact are established in Chapter 2, and are derived
from an in-depth review of relevant literature. Policy recommendations, in
turn, are based predominantly on the lessons learned from residents of a
relocation project (see Chapter 5). To this end, this study focuses on the
relocation of residents from Grassy Park and Ottery informal settlements, Lotus
River and the broader Cape Flats district to Pelican Park.
1.5. Establishing the Main research question
Based on the overarching aim of this study, the main research question asks:
What are the impacts of a state-led relocation project on beneficiaries’
housing satisfactions? And, what lessons might we learn from the Pelican Park
case study for future planning and housing policies?
1.6. Introducing the research methods
In order to answer the main research question, a number of research
methods and techniques are used. The former consists of the case study
research method. The case under study is Pelican Park. The research
techniques used for this study include: Semi-structured interviews with
residents of Pelican Park (Babbie and Mouton, 2002); non-participant
observations of the public spaces in Pelican Park (Widlock, 1999; Yin, 1994);
and surveys to establish generalised insights on how resettled beneficiaries
evaluate Pelican Park (Schutt, 2011). The method and each of these
techniques are discussed in Chapter 3.
1.7. The Structure of the dissertation
Chapter 2 establishes the literature review for analysing the case study area
and for establishing relevant policy recommendations. It takes an in-depth
look at the literature related to the study. The conceptual framework of for
housing satisfaction, relocation projects, sustainable human settlements and
post-occupation evaluation are raised in this chapter. This review of relevant
literature sets up the subsidiary research questions for this study. Finally, this
chapter gives indicators of housing satisfaction and looks at the
7
circumstances that make housing delivery modes satisfactory or
dissatisfactory.
Chapter 3 describes the methodology. This includes the research design,
procedure and techniques used to collect the data and the design of the
measuring instruments. The methods used in analysing the data are explained
as well. This chapter also encompasses discussions on conducting ethical
research in addition to discussions concerning the limitations of methods and
techniques used to collect data for study.
Chapter 4 provides the historical background of Pelican Park area and the
reasons for choosing the case study. Data of the case study, the results of the
semi-structured interview questionnaire and observation are included in this
chapter. The collected data is discussed, analysed and interpreted. This
chapter also presents the findings of the study and clarifies whether
satisfaction with housing has been achieved.
Chapter 5 presents the conclusions of the study as well as recommendations
for further research in the evaluation of housing satisfaction. The
recommendations made are based on the findings of the research and
literature reviewed. The chapter also presents the study limitations.
1.8. Conclusion
This chapter provided a brief background to the housing situation in South
Africa in order to contextualise the problem under study. Although the
government has initiated a number of programmes to solve the housing crisis
in South Africa, the challenge that remains is dissatisfaction amongst
beneficiaries. The main aim and research question were established in this
chapter, and the methods used to answer the main research question were
introduced. The following chapter will focus on a review of the relevant
literature for the purpose of establishing assessment criteria.
8
Chapter 2: Literature Review
2.1. Introduction
Chapter 1 introduces the problem under study as well as the main research
question. Post-occupancy evaluation of housing units in Pelican Park is crucial
for the determination of beneficiary satisfaction. Feedback from the
beneficiaries of low-income housing is important for developers, designers
and the government. This feedback can be used to ensure that future
settlements meet the occupants’ needs. Put differently, the research is used
to inform settlement design, thus, shifting focus to inhabitant needs as
opposed to the current focus on the number of houses delivered (Brand and
Orfield, 2004.
The aim of this chapter is to present an overview of the literature relating to
housing satisfaction. This chapter also serves to define and contextualise the
key areas of focus and concepts used in the research. The first section
discusses housing satisfaction and housing adequacy. In so doing, criteria for
satisfaction are established. Studies on housing satisfaction highlight that the
following characteristics determine the level of residential satisfaction:
physical quality of housing; presence of economic opportunities; level of
mobility; level of access to public services; level of access to basic services;
level of environmental resilience; and security of tenure. The chapter then
goes on to set up a criteria for assessing Pelican Park. It bears mentioning at
this juncture that some of the literature that is presented in this chapter might
be considered by some scholars as 'dated', and other literature is base d on
empirical evidence from the global North. While I am aware of these facts
(and the potential limitations of drawing from dated or global North studies), I
will demonstrate how and why this literature remains relevant to my study of a
situated context. It is to a discussion on housing satisfaction that the chapter
now turns.
9
2.2. Housing satisfaction
The perception of what constitutes satisfactory housing has been explored by
various disciplines and professions (Berkoz, Turk, Kellekci and 2009). For
example, urban planners tend to define satisfactory housing in relation to
socio-economic issues, location, participatory processes and quality of life
(Berkoz et al., 2009; Baker, 2002). Architects, in turn, view housing satisfaction
in terms of a feeling of 'happiness' with regards to the actual, physical, design
of a house and the outcomes of the design (Mohit et al., 2010).
Environmental psychologists, on the other hand, place emphasis on
environmental quality as well as human behaviour (van Kamp, Leidelmeijer,
Marsmann and de Hollander, 2003).
Policymakers focus on political processes and the extent of fulfilment of
individuals’ housing desires versus their needs (Salleh, 2008). Different
interpretations and definitions of housing satisfaction thus make it difficult to
be address the issue of housing satisfaction from one standpoint alone (Lu,
1999). However majority of definitions relate to socio-economic
environmental and physical wellbeing of occupants of housing within a
distinctive location. From a more quantitative standpoint, the term 'housing
satisfaction' might be understood as a ratio between an occupant's
predicated taste and to their expectations of the (housing) product (Lu,
1999). Thus in qualitative means housing satisfaction is the extent to which
housing assists inhabitants in attain their desires (Jiboye, 2012). Furthermore,
the term refers to an individual’s subjective evaluation of their housing
environment based on their needs, expectations and achievements (Huiand
Yu, 2009). Galster and Hesser (1981) in conjunction with Awotona (1991)
consider satisfactions the gap between beneficiaries’ actual and expected
housing conditions. For Buys and Miller (2012) satisfaction is a general analysis
of anticipated occupiers’ aspirations with regards to physical design of
dwelling counting facilities, size and the costs. The subjective and objective
evaluation of the housing attributes and surrounding neighbourhoods offers
important insight into which aspects of the setting have a greater impact on
10
occupants’ housing satisfaction (Adriaanse, 2007). With respect to the
neighbourhood, green spaces, environmental health upkeep and
cleanliness, as well as social dynamics are equally important predictors of
housing satisfaction (Rioux and Werner, 2011). Mohit et al., (2010) add
neighbourhood facilities to this list. The position of the neighbourhood in
relation to work places (employment opportunities) and other facilities such
as schools, the police station, hospital, market, shopping centres, public
library, religious buildings, bus and taxi stations are all factors that influence
resident satisfaction (Hiscock et al., 2001). In their study, Hiscock et al., (2001),
using housing tenure as the measure, found that housing satisfaction has to
do with living in an environmentally pleasant, safe and secure area, as well as
living in a larger and better quality dwelling unit. Family size, socio-economic
status and participation and interaction with neighbours influences levels of
satisfaction (Theodori, 2001; Varady et al., 2001 and Varady and Preiser,
1998).Community factors such as noise, crime, accidents, security and
community relations are also likely to impact on housing satisfaction (Mohit et
al., 2010). Physical aspects of housing such as room sizes and wall quality, also
contribute to the level of satisfaction (Thatsaid, Kaitila, 1993). These factors
determine, in part, the extent to which an occupant considers their house to
be adequate or not. It is to a discussion of the notion of adequate housing
that we now turn.
2.2.1. Adequate housing
The right to adequate housing is one of the most important basic human
rights that is recognised in various international human rights treaties (see, for
example, United Nations, 2009). It is a right that is enshrined in section 26(1) of
the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa. A house offers shelter from
the elements, a place to eat, sleep, relax and raise a family are some of the
basic things people need for survival. Chenwi (2013) and Evans (2013) argue
that housing is not adequate if it does not guarantee physical safety or
provide adequate space, as well as protection against threats to one’s
health and structural hazards. But this hides the fact that a house is more than
11
just bricks and mortar and more than a roof over one’s head. Rather, a house
is a home (Hulchanski and Leckie, 2000). For a house to satisfy occupants it
must be 'adequate' (United Nations, 2009). Spatial planning contributes to this
determination through the manner in which it distributes facilities (Waziri et al.,
2013). These definitions are found in the various housing policy documents,
including the Housing White paper and the 1997 Housing Act. However, it is
important to note that the Constitution does not go as far as to specify what
adequate housing' should encompass.
This is because the provincial and local tiers government are tasked with
determining what 'adequate' might mean in their specific areas of
jurisdiction. Yet, without a nuanced definition for of 'adequacy' in the South
African context, it remains challenging to evaluate housing satisfaction from
beneficiaries' standpoints Furthermore, this lack of clarity has, arguably,
resulted in prioritising quantity over quality approaches to housing delivery in
the South African context.
2.2.2. Assessing Housing Satisfaction
Due to the lack of clarity found within South African housing policy
frameworks, this research draws on various literature for the purpose of
evaluating housing satisfaction from beneficiaries' standpoints. Accordingly,
assessment criteria that is employed in this study are: (1) enabling mobility; (2)
enabling choice; (3) meeting economic needs; (4) meeting physical needs
(5) meeting social needs and enabling access to public services; (6);
enabling security of tenure; and (7) environmental resilience. These criteria,
derived from Ilesanmi (2010), Oladapo (2006) and other scholars' empirical
research, will be used to assess the quality of the Pelican Park case study (see
Chapter 4). Each of these is discussed below.
2.3. Enabling mobility
Residential mobility is identified as one measure of resident satisfaction.
(Galster and Hesser, 1981). The ideal location for housing allows access to
employment opportunities, healthcare services, schools, childcare centres
12
and other social facilities. This idea is discussed at length in section 2.9. For
now, the section continues with a discussion on enabling mobility. Urban
sprawl has resulted in increased dependence on individual transportation.
Consequently, the poorest and most vulnerable population groups such as
children and the elderly, with functional limitations are isolated (Cohen et al.,
2003; Latkin and Curry 2003). Scholars, therefore, argue that where possible
new housing should be located near to public transport in order to offer
people a choice of how to travel (Bentley et al., 1985; Dewar and
Uytenbogaardt, 1995; South Norfolk Council, 2012). Access to public transport
will help to reduce reliance on the private car and so reduce the
environmental impact of new development (Dewar and Uytenbogaardt,
1995; Bailey and Manzi, 2008)). Reducing the number of car journeys also has
the potential to enhance the experience of pedestrians and cyclists, both in
new developments and in existing places.
2.3.1. Enabling choice via accessibility, legibility and permeability
Oloefse (1999) argues that housing should be understood not only in terms of
its physical structure, but also in terms of what it represents, namely: a home
at the level of the individual, and a community at the level of a group. It
should also represent a viable settlement with accessible and legible links to
the broader urban and natural environment. It is important that residents are
able to move easily and cheaply into and out of their neighbourhood using
different modes of transport. The greater the accessibility of residential
location, the greater the area’s comparative advantage and the greater the
demand for housing in that location (Balchin, Kieve and Bull, 1988).
Accessibility of housing plays a big role in satisfying its users (Lu, 1999). Closely
related to this is the legibility of the area. The term legibility refers to how easy
it is for people to understand the layout of the area. According to Lynch
(1960), legibility can be described as the ease with which parts of the area
can be reorganised into a coherent pattern.
13
New streets and footpaths should connect into existing networks of streets
and footpaths to ensure that new housing is well linked into the surrounding
area (Jacobs, 1993). Settlement development that is well connected into the
wider network of routes serving existing development will help to create a
place without barriers to movement, as well as a place that is accessible to
all (Bentley et al., 1985; Jacobs, 1993). Settlement that is designed to become
a seamless part of the wider place rather than as somewhere separate and
different will help to promote a shared community identity (Dewar and
Uytenbogaardt, 1995; South Norfolk Council, 2012).
Visual and physical permeability is another element to consider in relation to
mobility. This refers to the level of accessibility of the area (Bentley et al.,
1978). A good quality urban environment will have a number of alternative
ways for residents to move through their environment (Bentley et al, 1978).
Successful places are based on a clear distinction between public and
private spaces (Jacobs, 1961; Bentley et al., 1985). This helps to make a place
feel secure, both for the occupier of a building, and the person in the street
(Jacobs, 1993). The relationships between public and private space are
particularly important for housing development. This principle of permeability
is so critical that it has to be one of the first considerations in the early stages
of spatial layouts If this is not done, chances are high that residents will be
dissatisfied with their residential environment (Bentley et. al, 1985). This is
difficult to alter once the development has been completed.
A clear hierarchy of streets helps people to find their way around a place
(Jacobs, 1961). Settlements should be designed around connected networks
of streets in a clear street hierarchy (Bentley et al., 1985; Dewar and &
Uytenbogaardt, 1995; South Norfolk Council, 2012). Such designs
accommodate vehicular movement and car parking, whilst ensuring that this
does not dominate the layout of buildings and spaces. Settlements that are
designed around car movement, do not create a sense of place (South
Norfolk Council, 2012).
14
The subsidiary research questions raised in this section are:
How accessible are socio-economic resources for the Pelican Park
residents?
How accessible is Pelican Park to the Cape Town central business
district?
How do beneficiaries feel about the location of their housing?
2.4. Diversity
Within the vocabulary of urban planning, the term diversity refers to the
quality that Jane Jacobs (1961) argue should characterize city life. Diversity
ranges from mixed income, racial and ethnic integration coupled with
accessible public space (Feinstein, 2005). Thriving settlements have mixed
uses whereas a separation of uses leads to settlements not to function well
(Jacobs, 1961). Thus a mixture of uses to sustain a city needs a variety of
ingredients (Jacobs, 1961). Lack of diversity is destructive to city life, but in
itself this does not get us far (Jacobs, 1961). Diversity settlements encourage
new enterprises and different ideas that cater for all groups and cultures and
bringing all of them together.
Thus in order for vibrant diversity to take place the following conditions are
crucial: (i) the settlements must serve more than one function; (ii) blocks
within the neighbourhood must be short, that is streets and opportunities to
turn corners must be frequent;(iii) districts must mingle buildings that vary in
age and condition;(iv) and there must be sufficient dense concentration of
people (Jacobs, 1961). Given the development of these four conditions a city
should be able to realize its best potential.
2.4.1. Diversity of land uses
In a given location people have different drives that push them to reside in
that area. Ideal settlements offer opportunities for people to settle on their
own but not be alone. People also desire private places that help
15
differentiate locals and strangers (Govender, 2011).Thus satisfaction can be
enabled by diversity of choices and this is influenced by degree of privacy
(Govender, 2011). Thus a hierarchy of uses movement systems and spaces
facilitates this. Socio-economic capital is strengthened by commercial
diverse uses. According to Jacobs (1961) variety and plenty commercial
activity within a city contains other forms of diversity, rich culture, great visual
characteristics and variety of population.
Fainstein (2010) suggests that cities require housing in any area to encompass
a broad income range and forbidding discrimination on the basis of race,
ethnicity, or disability constitute standards conducive to justice. The
embodiment of diversity ranges from mixed use to mixed income, racial and
ethnic integration to widely accessible public space (Fainstein, 2005).
2.4.2. Diversity of Population
It is simply unethical to practice discrimination based on inscriptive
characteristics like skin colour or nationality on the other (Fainstein, 2010).
Interracial contacts will reduce racial conflict or discrimination. This contact is
needed undeniably and addresses the deep divisions in society. Harvey
(1978) adds that diversity as adding to the appeal of locales and contributing
to social inclusion, they simultaneously seek to promote stronger community
ties. Jacobs (1961) acknowledge the importance of population diversity in
developing vibrant neighbourhoods, and advancing ideas across the world.
Thus there is a close relationship between population diversity and skills and
knowledge experienced in a city’s labour market (Fainstein, 2010). In terms of
stabilizing the population mix, is the role of the public sector in maintaining
the stock of public housing, keeping units within the rent regulation programs,
and retaining structures whose occupants receive housing subsidies
(Fainstein, 2000).
The subsidiary research questions raised in this section are:
Did beneficiaries have a housing choice?
How does Pelican Park enable cultural diversity?
16
2. 5. Meeting economic needs
Planners needs to ensure that the housing development enables the
beneficiary to have access to and be engaged in local economic
development initiatives. Adequate housing must provide variety of
opportunities for local economic development (BESG, 1999). This point has
been discussed further by Baumann (2003) who argues that there is a
relationship between housing and poverty. He argues that low-income
housing should contribute, both directly and indirectly, to the gainful
employment of housing beneficiaries through the use of emerging local small
building contractors and labour intensive building methods. UN-Habitat
(2005) regulations, for new housing developments, mandate that
economically sustainable housing should allow and encourage the
development of small-scale manufacturing and service activities in the
home. BESG (1999) also states that there is a need to train small builders to
participate in the small scale material manufacturer, in order to create jobs
and curb the massive unemployment rate. Single use zoning has been one
setback for potential mixed activities in settlements. If within a residential area
there are vast opportunities for individuals to be employed, their level of
satisfaction increases as they become more financially secure. This has the
additional benefit of decreasing residential mobility occurring as people do
not leave the residential area to seek employment (Diaz-Serrano &
Stoyanova, 2010). This then creates the opportunity for residents to become
more attached to the community (Grillo et al., 2010).
According to the United Nations (2012) access to well-located land by the
landless needs to be considered as a central policy goal. Access to land
increases the possibility of the poor accessing housing, which is a financial
asset (Narayan et al., 2000). Thus, it is one of the few safety nets that the poor
can possess. It can be sold in the event of financial difficulties and
desperation. Housing may contribute to the redistribution of wealth as it can
17
serve as collateral for credit for home improvements or the development of
small businesses for example (Charlton, 2009).
Beneficiaries are motivated to invest their time and money in consolidation if
they are permitted to retain their land (Tissington 2010). They beneficiaries
can use their title deeds as security or collateral to access loans for housing
improvement. The United Nations (2009) notes that people voluntarily
improve their dwellings to the fullest extent they are capable of when they
have secure tenure. However, if people feel insecure, they will refrain from
making home improvements even if they have the means (Mahanga, 2002).
This is because they are unsure of their future living circumstances. The
government or land owner can demolish their structures should they decide
to evict them from those areas. Dewar and Uytenbogaart (1995) argue that
the capacity of sustainable human settlements must be enhanced so that
economic opportunities can be generated. This is important because, as
they argue, in future many people will have no option in future except to
generate their own economic capacities. Therefore, the creation of vibrant
local economies and promotion of trade is, and will be, crucial for local
beneficiaries’ satisfaction. Dewar and Uytenbogaart (1995) further note that
effective planning could create conditions favouring decentralisation, which
would provide jobs closer to home. This is important particularly in South
Africa where apartheid planning situated townships on the urban fringe.
Opportunities, particularly economic opportunities, and services within the
CBD are difficult to access from these locations (Khan, 2003). Location is a
crucial element for sustainable human settlements. This idea is discussed at
length in section 2.7.1. For now, the section continues with a discussion on
housing affordability.
2.5.1. Housing affordability
The housing market should be available and accessible to individuals from all
levels of income (Amnesty International, 2010). High housing costs often have
the ‘knock-on’ effect of diminishing the poor’s ability to pay for other basic
essentials including food and the opposite is true for high income groups.
18
Adriaanes (2007) and Lu (1999) found that higher income households are
generally satisfied with their housing. This is because higher income earners
can improve their housing through alterations and renovations to suit their
lifestyles. Frank and Enkwa (2009) further argue that higher incomes enable
housing consumers to move to a better location or neighbourhood of their
choice. This possibly accounts for the greater levels of satisfaction exhibited
by wealthier groups. United Nations (2009) notes that housing related costs
should not compromise basic needs of beneficiaries. For those in rental
tenure measure should be set up to protect them from steep rent prices so as
to increase housing satisfaction (Chenwi, 2013). Thus the government must
support in forms of housing subsidies and other forms of finance to support
the underprivileged (Evans, 2013). United Nations (2009) concludes that
housing satisfaction cannot be attained if such costs hinder beneficiaries’
enjoyment of other human rights.
The subsidiary research questions raised in this section are:
How are Pelican Park residents using their houses for income
generation purposes?
If they are not using their home for these purposes, what prevents them
from doing so?
2.6. Physical Attributes of the Housing
Housing satisfaction is dependent, in part, on the physical dimensions of
houses. Such dimensions encompass typology, size, aesthetics and location
amongst others. For Toscano and Amestoy (2008) physical aspects of the
house such as common areas, ventilation, lighting and orientation of
windows within the house also contribute towards overall housing satisfaction.
Typology affects the quality of life of beneficiaries as alluded to earlier. The
house type which provides privacy might give rise to high(er) satisfaction for
some beneficiaries (Baiden et al., 2011). The common usage of some areas
and amenities outside the house might increase housing satisfaction in some
cases (Konadu, 2001).
19
Overall, the house should be well constructed using high quality (as opposed
to substandard) building materials. Beamish et al. (2001: 24) note housing
quality as an accepted cultural standards and norms and standards for the
physical conditions and the amenities required. According to Lindamood
and Hanna (1979:85), the measurement of the quality of a dwelling unit
involves the subjective reactions of people to attributes of a dwelling unit.
These attributes include equipped kitchens, central heat and complete
indoor plumbing as well as the soundness of the structure to mention a few.
However, objective attributes can be used to define and measure the
physical quality of a house. One of these attributes is living space. Larger
living space per capita not only meets basic physical but also psychological
needs (Harris et al., 1996). Kinsey and Lane (1983) contend that the amount
of space in a dwelling unit directly relates to residential satisfaction. They
further argue that the number of rooms, size of the home, inside and outside
appearance, amount of storage and utilities costs are directly related to
residential satisfaction. Higher quality of dwelling unit correlates high
satisfaction levels (Elsinga and Hoekstra, 2005). Housing unity quality is both
assed from the structural elements and general cleanliness of surrounding
area (Westaway, 2006).
The occupiers’ health status is affected by the housing conditions (Bonnefoy,
2007). The house does impact on the psychological and mental wellbeing of
beneficiaries. This is due to the fact that at the end of our daily endeavours it
is the last refuge (Bonnefoy, 2007). Various health complications are directly
related to the housing unit itself. The use of substandard materials triggers
health effects on beneficiaries (Bonnefoy, 2007). For example mould growth
serves as relevant occurrence of infestations, thus it shows deficiencies in
hygiene and sanitation services.
There is a visual element to housing quality assessment. This assessment
encompasses the identification of indicators of potential structural problems.
These indicators include open cracks, peeling paint, water leaks, crumbling in
the foundation and sagging or uneven roofing.
20
2.6.1. Location
Good location is a complex concept to define, but access to employment,
transport and urban opportunities and facilities are useful indicators (Tonkin,
2008). Appropriate well-located sites are in close proximity to transport,
economic activities and services. For the poor, location is often more
important than housing quality (Tonkin, 2008). It directly impacts on the
accessibility of urban opportunities and underpins social networks and
livelihood strategies critical for survival (Tonkin, 2008). Greater social
integration may also result from the location of low-income households on
well-located land. Baiden et al., (2011) argue that preference on the location
of the house varies according to age, income level and family size. Current
location of low income housing developments in South Africa has is evident
to perpetuate apartheid settlements. Furthermore location of public and
economic services is also important. Rich public spaces have locational
advantage and are easily acceptable to the public (Govender, 2011).Such
facilities with location advantage attract unique informal activities
enhancing trade and business satisfaction.
2. 6.2. House Size
Adequate housing is housing that provides suitable space for eating, sleeping
and family life (BESG, 1999). Not only is the size of the house measured but the
age of the house is also taken into consideration. In particular, housing
capacity is measured to capture the condition of the housing unit. Housing
capacity is calculated as number of persons in the household divided by the
number of bedrooms (BESG, 1999). This measure is meant to show whether or
not the housing unit is large enough for the size of the family living in it. The
amount of private, indoor space accessible to household members overall is
also measured. In addition to housing capacity, BESG (1999) notes that the
number of rooms, the number of bathrooms as well as the floor area should
also be considered. Goux and Maurin (2005) argue that the space
characteristic that is of primary concern to families is the number of rooms.
Overcrowding and lack of space can affect people’s health and overall
21
quality of life. Research has shown that there is a strong link between
overcrowding and respiratory infections such as bronchitis and tonsillitis in
children. A strong link has also been established between overcrowding and
psychological distress, especially amongst women. Gove, Hughes and Galle
(1979, cited in Goux and Maurin, 2005) note there is a very clear correlation
between the number of persons per room and individual’s mental and
physical health. They also find that children in small families perform much
better than children in large families. This, they argue, is due to the fact that
they live in less crowded homes. The size of the dwelling unit currently
produced for low income groups is 40 m². This is marginally bigger than the 30
m² Reconstruction Development Programme (RDP) units which were rolled
out before 2004.
2.6.3. Architectural quality
Resilient settlements are ones that are attractive to live in now and will be into
the future, when lifestyles and other circumstances may have changed
(Bentley et al., 1985; Dewar and Uytenbogaardt, 1995; Bailey & Manzi, 2008;
South Norfolk, 2012). To achieve this, they need to function well, to be built to
last, to be attractive initially and to remain so over time (Bentley et al., 1985).
Good architecture should be fit for purpose; durable and well-built; and
pleasing to the mind and the eye (South Norfolk, 2012).
2.6.4. Distinctive character
Giving new housing development a character and quality helps community
pride and ownership, which increases the likelihood that local people will
look after and maintain it well (Jacobs,1961). For neighbourhoods, a variety
of distinctive character makes it possible for people to recognise different
parts and to know where they are (South Norfolk, 2012). Balance and
coherence with different parts in the city to create unique place is needed
(Jacobs, 1961).Housing development should be designed to have a positive
character that is appropriate for the place where it is located, the type of
development to be provided and also the likely lifestyle of occupiers (South
Norfolk, 2012). Dwelling size is used in this study as an indicator of housing
22
satisfaction in order to assess the level of congruence between policy
prescriptions and the expectations of the beneficiaries.
The subsidiary research questions raised in this section are:
How satisfied are residents with the size, quality and physical
construction of their home?
What, if any, concerns do residents have in relation to the structure of
their houses?
Are there any visible indications of potential structural defects?
2.7. Meeting social needs and enabling access to public services
Various researchers have studied different aspects of community satisfaction.
Erdogan et al. (2007) indicate that social living conditions positively influence
housing satisfaction. With presence of strong social ties one values social
capital more than economic aspirations (Erdogan et al., 2007). Parkes et al.
(2002) argue that there is a relationship between housing satisfaction and
one’s feelings toward their neighbours. Similarly, Westaway (2006) uses
neighbour camaraderie in their neighbourhood satisfaction model.
Zanuzdana et al. (2012) note the positive effects of establishing strong social
relations through membership in a community or Non-Governmental
Organisation on housing satisfaction. The social environment consists of the
social interactions, relationships and social activities in which a person
participates (Sirgy and Cornwell, 2002). The presence of strong social
networks in the neighbourhood, which provide baby-sitters, social support
and food share arrangements, have been identified as fundamental to
housing satisfaction in shantytowns in Puerto Rico (Caldieron, 2011). Hourihan
(1984) argues that belonging to a social class and local social attachments
influence residents’ housing satisfaction levels. It was also found that
residential satisfaction levels increase in direct proportion to the proximity of
relatives and friends to the new housing (Galster and Hesser, 1981; Hourihan,
1984). Grzeskowiak et al., (2003) developed a model that linked social, family,
work and financial satisfaction to satisfaction with community services. Their
23
findings suggest social life as the most proximate antecedent to housing
satisfaction (ibid.). A home perceived as safe and intimate provides major
psychosocial benefits (Bonnefoy, 2007). It represents a refuge from the
outside world, enables the development of a sense of identity and
attachment as an individual and provides a space to be oneself (Bonnefoy,
2007). Any stressors limit this feeling of safety, intimacy and control, thereby
reducing the social function of the home (Kearns et al., 2000). As for Potter
and Cantarero (2006) social relationships are more crucial in satisfying
residents than physical environment.
2.7.1. Sense of belonging
For this study a community is a group of people living in the same defined
area sharing the same basic values, organization and interests (Rifkin et al,
1988. Excessive and repetitive noise due to overcrowding in high density
housing complexes and a lack of parks and ovals for example, reduces one’s
attachment to their community. Consequently it decreases residential
satisfaction (Braubach, 2007; da Luz Reis and Lay, 2010; James et al., 2009).
As a result, the level of attachment one has to their residential community
influences their level of housing satisfaction. The greater the sense of
belonging a person is to a community, the higher their level of satisfaction
(Grillo et al., 2010; Young et al., 2004). The level of attachment one feels for
their community influences, in turn, their level of housing satisfaction (Aiello et
al., 2010). This attachment is described as a bond between a person and
their social and physical environment (Grillo et al., 2010). An individual
develops an attachment to their house through their social relationships,
economic homeownership, length of residence and investments made within
the community (Aiello et al., 2010; Bonauto et al., 1999; Grillo et al., 2010;
James et al., 2009).
Strong social networks within a community increase a person’s satisfaction
levels. Through these networks they gain support and opportunities for social
24
interaction. These networks also compensate for poor environmental
conditions (Aiello et al., 2010; Grillo et al., 2010). For example, Filkins et al.
(2000) examined social/spiritual satisfaction. This term refers to social ties such
as local friendships and kinships that foster strong community sentiments. It
was found that social/spiritual attributes strongly influenced community
satisfaction. The more satisfied a resident was with this area in their life, the
higher their community satisfaction (Filkins et al., 2000).
2.7.2. Safety
Another community factor that is likely to predict housing satisfaction is safety
(Mohit et al., 2010). It is reasonable to suppose that crime and disorder affect
residents’ perceptions of their safety, which is likely to reduce satisfaction with
the neighbourhood. Fear of crime and feelings of diminished personal safety
are predictors of community dissatisfaction (Carro et al., 2010; Hur and
Morrow-Jones, 2008). When residents perceive their community as unsafe
they are less likely to be satisfied. This perception can result in high residential
mobility out of the area (Diaz-Serrano and Stoyanova, 2010). In their study,
Chapman and Lombard (2006) found that less than 10 % of 10,992,999
households of their sample believed crime existed in their community despite
crime rate statistics showing higher occurrences of criminal activity in the
community. This perception of low crime in the community resulted in high
levels of residential satisfaction. It also resulted in low levels of residential
mobility out of the area.
2.7.3. Sense of community
The creation of a sense of community is an important aspect of social capital
because it helps to build relationships between individuals and households. A
sense of community is cultivated by the active involvement of a community
in the planning, decision-making and ongoing management of a housing
project (Ross et al. 2010). Furthermore, community participation at local
government level is a must because it is legislated through the Municipal
Systems Act (MSA) of 2000. However, the MSA does not provide guidance on
addressing the political struggles that often occur at the local level.
25
Furthermore, some analysts argue that in the post-apartheid period, social
capital within communities has been eroded as many community leaders
took positions in government that placed them outside of their communities
(Pottie 2004).
2.7.4. Beneficiary involvement in project development
One way to guarantee beneficiary satisfaction is to involve future occupants
in the formulation of the development. The community should be involved in
the planning from the earliest possible moment (Amnesty International, 2010).
The stronger the role of disadvantaged groups in formulating and
implementing policy, the more redistribution will be the outcomes (Fainstein,
2010).In short, it is the means by which the have-not citizens can induce
significant social reform which enables them to share in the benefits of the
affluent society( (Fainstein, 2010). Arnstein (1969) concludes that without a
redistribution of decisional power, there will be no redistribution of benefits.
Laying the foundations of an equitable city requires civic authorities to adopt
an inclusive mode of planning and policymaking. Indeed, Fainstein argues
that any such planning must be done strictly in consultation with local
communities and the population at large. Only with full public participation in
the creation of public spaces can truly great places come into being. These
groups must be represented in their interests (Fainstein, 2010).City
development is an organic process and cannot be approached with a one
size fit all recipe. Thus moving people against their will democracy and equity
are forfeited (Fainstein, 2010). All these disadvantaged groups must have full
access to information about the planned project. They must also be involved
in decisions on housing designs and ways to protect their access to
livelihoods and jobs (Amnesty International, 2010).
2.7.5. Enabling access to public services.
The level of access to public facilities or services also influence residential
satisfaction in many ways. Lu (1999) argues that level of access to both public
and private services and/or facilities such as shopping, banking and parking
26
facilities determine the degree of convenience of life. Thus, they have and
influence on residential satisfaction (Grzeskowiak et al., 2003; Potter and
Cantarero, 2006). Filkins et al. (2000) found that the more satisfied a resident
was with public services, community or residential satisfaction was positively
influenced. The availability of social services is an important indicator to be
used in the identification of high quality housing environments. The level of
access to social infrastructure contributes to the wellbeing of the beneficiary
community. Thus poor infrastructure delivery means poor quality of the
housing environment (Sowman and Urquhart, 1998). This in turn diminishes the
quality of life of the residents. Sowman and Urquhart (1998) also contend that
the provision of appropriate social services increases quality of life, reduces
health risks and maintains or improves the natural environment and
residential satisfaction.
Bonnefoy (2007) claims that the housing environment has an impact on
health through the design. Poorly planned or run down residential areas often
lack public services, green open spaces and walking areas. Increased
prevalence of obesity, cognitive problems in children, a loss of the ability to
socialise and high levels of occupier residential dissatisfaction have been
found in these areas (Bonnefoy, 2007). Residential decline affects residents
through both visual and social mechanisms. Examples of the former include
litter and pollution, whilst examples of the latter include segregation and
increased insecurity (Bonnefoy, 2007). Housing cannot be deemed adequate
if it excludes residents from employment opportunities schools and other
facilities (United Nations, 2009).
2.7.6. Enabling access to basic services
Basic services are critical to housing satisfaction because good service levels
provide a basis on which an individual can develop a good quality of life.
The term basic services refers to those engineering services that are essential
to the functioning of settlements (Govender, 2011). They include water
27
provision, sewage removal, storm water disposal, solid waste removal and
electricity supply (Govender, 2011). These services are essential to the
maintenance of public health in settlements and safeguarding the dignity of
residents. Govender (2011) notes, as a general principle, that utility services
should be provided as efficiently and as cost-effectively as possible.
Cognisance of the human and environmentally centred approach to
settlement making proposed herein. However, in terms of settlement
structuring, utility services should follow and not lead. Poor service levels
reduce the levels of satisfaction with the housing environment. This puts
negative impacts on the environment and its occupants. For example, if
people are not provided with services such as sanitation and garbage
collection, they are at a risk of contracting diseases such as diarrhoea,
hepatitis and typhoid (Cantarero, 2006). For health and safety purposes,
beneficiaries must have access to potable water, waste disposal and
adequate sanitation (Sowman and Urquhart 1998; BESG, 1999).
The subsidiary research questions raised in this section are:
Has the goal of providing basic services to Pelican Park households
been achieved?
If yes are the beneficiaries satisfied with the quality of services?
To what extent, if at all, were beneficiaries involved in the formulation
and implementation of the Pelican Park housing development project?
How do Pelican Park residents feel about crime in the area?
What influence do Pelican Park residents have on their sense of place,
belonging and sense of community?
What public services do the beneficiaries have access to within
walking distance?
What public services do beneficiaries require?
How satisfied are residents with the social recreational and educational
services provided in and around Pelican Park?
28
2.8. Security of tenure
If people do not have secure tenure their housing satisfaction is questionable.
Baiden et al. (2011) argues that the major factor defining the economic
dimension of housing satisfaction is home ownership. Hornby (2005:1526)
defines tenure as: the legal right to live in a house or use a piece of land. It
provides conditions under which land is held by occupier. Tenure exists in
different ownership forms that is; rental (public and private) accommodation,
lease ownership, owner-occupation and informal settlements (United Nations,
2009. Thus housing becomes inadequate when its occupants do not have a
degree of tenure security as this guarantees protection against various
threats (Chenwi, 2013; Evans, 2013).Secure tenure is a necessary, but not
sufficient, condition for enabling housing satisfaction and creating
sustainable urban livelihoods (Payne, 2002). However, security of tenure alone
is not enough to significantly increase levels of investment in house
improvement (Mbonane, 1999). We do, however, need to note the role of
tenure in housing improvement. Security of tenure is crucial for occupation
protection (2010, Amnesty International). People have security of tenure
when they are protected, by law and in practice, against being unjustly or
arbitrarily thrown out of their homes (2010, Amnesty International). Lack of
security of tenure undermines family life, health and economic welfare. It
increases people feelings of insecurity, vulnerability and poverty (Amnesty
International, 2010). Security of tenure provides stability and encourages
people to improve their houses and environment (Amnesty International,
2010).
The subsidiary research questions raised in this section are:
What type of tenure is offered to Pelican Park residents?
And how does it impact on their lives?
29
2.9. Environmental resilience
Green spaces, environmental health, upkeep and cleanliness and pace of
life are the environmental predictors of residential satisfaction (Rioux and
Werner, 2011). Polluted sites are not favourable for housing development as
well as areas in close proximity to threats of occupants (UN-Habitat, 2012).
Poor hygiene and sanitation as well as crowding are typical problems of
growing settlements and cities of the global South. Most of this growth is
occurring in low income housing areas (Bonnefoy, 2007). The more
aesthetically pleasing an area is, the higher the level of residential
satisfaction. Bonnefoy, 2007, found that residents in all income classes pay
more attention to cleanliness and neatness. With different incomes varying
levels of waste and sewerage removal services are experienced. As a result,
residents experience varying levels of residential (dis)satisfaction.
The subsidiary research questions raised in this section are:
What are the environmental challenges faced in Pelican Park?
Which environmental factors lead to satisfaction or dissatisfaction with
housing?
2.10. Conclusion
Housing satisfaction cannot be achieved if the above issues are not taken
into account during the conceptualisation and implementation of low
income housing projects. The only way to obtain housing satisfaction is by
ensuring that housing provided produces a pleasant, safe and convenient
environment in which to live. Residential quality is a critical factor in housing
satisfaction. It is important to consider the beneficiaries’ preferences with
respect to their preferred residential environment. Housing provided should
not only meet their shelter requirements. It should also offer residents and
occupants a wide array of choices. In the discussion above, a number of
indicators – mobility; diversity; economic opportunities; housing typology;
social needs; access to basic and public services, and; security of tenure –
are identified. These indicators, which are presented in table 2.1 below, will
30
be used to examine the varying levels of housing satisfaction in state assisted
relocation projects in Pelican Park, Cape Town. Table 2.1 also contains the
subsidiary research questions, which were derived from the assessment
criteria. It is a discussion of the research methods and techniques used to
collect the data that the dissertation not turns, in Chapter 3. This will be
followed by an analysis of the research findings in accordance with the
assessment criteria is undertaken in Chapter 4.
Table 2.1 summary of the criteria for assessing the Pelican Park case
Assessment criteria derived from
the literature review
Subsidiary research questions derived from the assessment
criteria
Criteria for satisfaction/
dissatisfaction
enabling mobility -legibility and permeability,
accessibility to community (Low
transportation costs, convenience
and variety of modes of transport)
-How accessible are socio-economic resources for the
Pelican Park residents?
-How accessible is Pelican Park to the Cape Town central
business district?
-How do beneficiaries feel about the location of their
housing?
Diversity -diversity of land uses, diversity of
population, catering for the
disadvantaged group and variety
of housing choice.
-Did beneficiaries have a housing choice?
-How does Pelican Park enable cultural diversity?
-And how is integration enabled in Pelican Park?
meeting economic needs -Housing enabling economic
opportunities, housing affordability
and market accessibility, housing
subsidies and meeting other
economic needs
-How are Pelican Park residents using their houses for income
generation purposes?
-If they are not using their home for these purposes, what
prevents them from doing so?
-What housing-related costs did beneficiaries experience or
are still experiencing? Are these costs manageable or not?
Meeting physical needs. -adequate size, suitable location,
housing quality, distinctive
character and other physical
aspects
-How satisfied are residents with the size, quality and physical
construction of their home?
-What, if any, concerns do residents have in relation to the
structure of their houses?
-Are there any visible indications of potential structural
defects?
31
Meeting social needs and
enabling access to public services
-Beneficiary involvement in project
development, safety, sense of
community, sense of belonging
and meeting other social needs,
adequate and accessible public
services and provision of adequate
and affordable basic services
-provision of adequate and
affordable basic services
-To what extent, if at all, were beneficiaries involved in the
formulation and implementation of the Pelican Park housing
development project?
-How do Pelican Park residents feel about crime in the area?
-What influence do Pelican Park residents have on their sense
of place, belonging and sense of community?
-What public services do the beneficiaries have access to
within walking distance?
-What public services do beneficiaries require?
-How satisfied are residents with the social recreational and
educational services provided in and around Pelican Park?
-Has the goal of providing basic services to Pelican Park
households been achieved?
-If yes are the beneficiaries satisfied with the quality of
services?
security of tenure, - Secure tenure -What type of tenure is offered to Pelican Park residents?
-Are there any challenges to securing tenure?
Environmental resilience -Neatness, aesthetic pleasantness,
hygiene and environmental
resilience
-What are the environmental challenges faced in Pelican
Park?
-Which environmental factors lead to satisfaction or
dissatisfaction with housing?
32
Chapter 3: Research Methods
3.1. Introduction
Chapter 2 presented the main and subsidiary research questions. It also
contains a review of the relevant literature. This chapter outlines how the
study was conducted. That is, it outlines the research procedure in detail. In
order to answer the main research question, a number of research methods
and techniques are used (Schutt, 2011). The former consists of the case study
research method.
The following research techniques were used: non-participant observations
and participant observation and individual semi-structured, in-depth
interviews.
Research involves collecting data that helps the researcher answer questions
regarding various aspects of society (Bailey, 1984). Patterson and Shannon
(1993) describe research as an inquiry; an attempt to understand actions,
polices and events that shape society. The main goal of the study is to assess
housing satisfaction levels amongst beneficiaries of government housing
programme in the Cape Town Metropolitan Municipality. In particular, this
study aims to assess the housing satisfaction levels of the beneficiaries of the
Pelican Park Housing project. The first section of this chapter outlines the
research methods utilised in this study.
3.2. Research methods
The main research question from the beneficiaries influenced, to a large
extent, the choice of research methods and techniques to be used in this
study. This study is a qualitative research endeavour.
3.2.1. The case study method
The case study method is, according to De Vaus (2002), an important
cornerstone of any research project that aims to examine social issues. Case
studies are:
33
a type of qualitative research in which the researcher explores a single entity
phenomenon (the case), which is bounded by time and activity (a program,
event, process, institution or social group) and collects detailed information by
using a variety of data collection procedures during a sustained period of
time.
(Leedy, 1997:25)
Cohen and Manion (2002:99) argue that:
the purpose of a case study is to probe deeply and to analyse the multifarious
phenomena that constitute the life of the unit with a view to establishing
generalisations about a wider population to which that unit belongs.
In this research, the case is the Pelican Park housing project. The case was
evaluated and understood with respect to the criteria identified in Chapter 2.
As Yin (1997) notes, conducting evaluations. It also favours the collection of
data in natural settings as opposed to the reliance of data that is derived
from secondary sources (Bromley, 1986).
Fryberg (2001; 2006) argues that case studies produce practical knowledge
to inform practical action. This is important for the research because it
encourages enables acquisition of concrete practical knowledge.
According to Yin (2012) the case study method has not achieved
widespread recognition as a method of choice. Failure of this recognition has
been due to myths associated with the method. According to Flyvbjerg
(2006) five misunderstanding on case studies exists:
(I) Misunderstanding 1: General theoretical knowledge is more valuable that
practical knowledge. With regards to this myth Flyvbjerg (2006) found that the
study on human affairs have no anticipating theories and universals in them.
Thus concrete practical knowledge is more valuable than arrogant search for
anticipating theories and universals.
(ii) Misunderstanding 2: One cannot generalise on the basis of one case
leading to failure of case study to contribute to scientific knowledge.
Flyvbjerg (2006) argues that on the basis of a single case one can generalise
34
their findings and the case may be a key to scientific development through
generalisation with or without other methods.
(iii) Misunderstanding 3: Case studies are most useful for generating
hypothesis thus during the first stages of research, however other methods are
more helpful in hypothesis testing and theory building. Flyvbjerg (2006) notes
that the case study is both good for achieving and testing hypothesis. The
case study is not only limited to these research activities alone.
(iv) Misunderstanding 4: There is bias towards verification is evident with the
case study as the researchers preconceived notions tend to be confirmed.
Flyvbjerg (2006) claims the case study has no greater bias towards the
researchers preconceived notions compared to other methods. On the other
hand experience has shown that the case study has less bias towards
verification and huge bias against falsification of preconceived notions.
(v) Misunderstanding 5: A case study makes it difficult to summarise and
develop general propositions and theories as the basis of the distinct case
study. Flyvbjerg (2006) asserts that indeed summarizing case studies is
challenging this is true for the case process. However for the case outcome it
is less correct. Challenges of summarising case studies are due to the nature
of reality studies as opposed to the case as a research method. Furthermore
Flyvbjerg (2006) suggests that it is commendable to summarise and
generalise case studies rather they should be utilised as narratives in their
entirety.
This research has been carefully designed to overcome such biases and
misunderstandings. These concerns are addressed further in section 3.3.4.1
and 3.3.4.2. One distinctive feature of the case study is that it contributed to
the knowledge of experience of the researcher. The aim of this research was
to generalise from my findings of a low income housing project and how it
impacts satisfaction amongst residents living in these settlements across South
Africa and the Global South.
35
3.3. Research Techniques
This section discusses the research techniques that are utilised in my study.
These techniques are: non-participant observations and participant
observation and individual semi-structured, in-depth interviews.
3.3.1. Observation
According to Cohen and Manion (2002 cited in Rashe, 2006), an important
aspect of a case study is observations. There are two broad types of
observations, namely non-participant and participant observation. Data was
collected conventionally using my five senses, taking field notes, transcribing
and ultimately creating a narrative based on what had been seen, heard or
sensed. Mechanical devices such as video cameras, recoding, and
photographs helped in depicting the observations in the field.
3.3.1.1. Non-participant Observation
Cohen and Manion (1980) state that in undertaking non-participant
observation a researcher sets him- or her-self completely apart from that
observed. The researcher is somewhat like a spectator at an interested, but
not part of it. As a non-participant observer I had to observe settlement setup
as well as how the municipality is working aiding information to phrasing
questions. Observation provided ways to understand users. Using non-
participant observations three questions arose. These are:
How do beneficiaries feel about the location of their housing?
How does Pelican Park enable cultural diversity?
How are Pelican Park residents using their houses for income generation
purposes?
One of the benefits of non-participant observation is its informality. It occurs
without any formal structures unlike surveys and interviews (Yin, 1994). Formal
structures involve notifying residents in advance that the researcher will carry out a
study. Non-participant observations decrease the opportunities available for
participants to customise their routines just for me. That being said, however,
36
observers do have some impact on those they are observing. The observed
can be tense and feel the need to change their behaviour. That is, they suit
their attitude for the observer or vice-versa knowing that they are being
watched. This is known as reactivity. It can be reduced if the purpose of
observation and how the data will be used are made known to the research
participants in advance. It is worth mentioning that the non-participant
observations were not solely on the residents but observations of the broader
socio-economic processes within the Pelican Park setting not just one
individual.
3.3.1.2. Participant observation
Researchers embark in participant behaviour and activities of those they
observe because they participate in their activities (Bless and Higgson-Smith,
1995). Furthermore, they get absorbed into the culture of the groups (Yin,
2012). As an insider, I gained deeper insight into the research problem. The
researcher enjoys the confidence of participants and shares their
experiences without disturbing their behaviour (Bless and Higgson-Smith,
1995). However, end up being distracted from their research purpose by tasks
given to them by the group. For example, note making becomes much more
have to be done after and not during the event ideally the same evening
(Yin, 2012).It is necessary, therefore, to guard against becoming too group’s
culture and activities as one can lose sight of the research goals be blinded
to alternative perspectives (Yin, 2012).Being directly involved with people and
their daily concerns for time made me emotionally attached with people
and events.
Somekh and Jones (2011) suggest that if the clothing worn by the observer
merges into context and signals equality for status with those who are being
observed then much attraction is given to the observer impacting largely on
group behaviour. When a researcher goes into role and imitate the general
behaviour of the group he/she surprisingly attracts little attention and has
relatively little impact on group behaviour (Somekh and Jones, 2011). It is still
37
problematic though when the researcher gets people performing even more
on the basis of what they perceive to be your residents.
3.3.2. Individual Semi-structured, in-depth interviews
The semi-structured interview is a qualitative data collection strategy in which
the researcher asks research participants a series of predetermined but
open-ended questions (Given, 2008). This approach allows the researcher to
have more control over the topics of the interview than in unstructured
interviews. In contrast to questionnaires that use closed questions, there is no
fixed range of responses to each question (Given, 2008). The open-ended
nature of the questions to be asked enables the interviewee to define the
topic under investigation (Hancock, 2002). Semi- structured interviews make
use of probing to gain in-depth information. To this end, the interviews are in-
depth interviews. Probing allowed the researcher to follow up on responses
given by research participants. Participants were encouraged and prompted
to talk in depth about issues under investigation.
Preparation for semi-structured interviews includes drafting a list of topics the
interviewer intends to discuss (Hancock, Ockleford and Windridge, 2009). The
nature of the research, the concepts and relationships between concepts
lend themselves to the use of semi-structured interviews. Semi-structured
interviews provided subjective information on housing satisfaction in Pelican
Park. These interviews allowed different expression of thoughts on the housing
project. Thus semi-structured interviews are a form of interaction between
interviewer and respondent (Babbie and Mouton, 2002). Blanche, Durrheim
and Painter (2006) believe that interviews create a more natural platform for
interaction and connecting with respondents. This is more productive than
asking research participants to complete questionnaires. It also fits within an
interpretative approach to gather in-depth information to understand deeply
the phenomenon under study.
Both the semi-structured and unstructured interviews offer rich and more
extensive material than surveys do. On the surface, the open-ended sections
38
of questionnaire surveys may resemble open-ended interviews but the latter
are generally less structured and can assume a lengthy conversational mode
not usually found in surveys (Yin, 2012). For example, open ended interviews
can be two or more hours in length each (Yin, 2012). Such conversations can
also take place over the course of an entire day with a researcher and one
or more participants accompanying one another to view or participate in
different events. Thus, in-depth individual interviews give the researcher an
opportunity to get to know people quite intimately. In this manner, the
researcher can really understand how the participants the feel about their
housing.
3.3. Triangulation
One needs to constantly check and recheck the consistency of their findings
(Duneier, 1999). This can be done through triangulation and several data
collection methods (Kennedy, 2009). In doing so, I can determine where
certain lines of data are biased. It helps to improve the reliability and validity
of the research. With regards to triangulation various data collection methods
were used that is observations, semi-structured in depth interviews and follow
up interviews. This aided in validating the claims that arose from the study.
Triangulation helped to acquire variety of viewpoints upon the study.
3.3.1. Validity and Reliability
Validity refers to the truth contained in proposition, presumptions and
conclusions made in the research (Bless and Higson-Smith, 1995). External
validity is about whether the conclusions made in the research can be
applied or generalised and hold true for other people or places at other
times (Trochim, 2006). There are three threats to external validity. Internal
validity is about the accuracy of conclusions with respect to cause- or causal
relationships (Bless and Higson-Smith, 1995).
Time constraints prevented me from being out in the field for too long that is
why I had follow up interviews to confirm what residence were saying. I
further interviewed different stakeholders to acquire broad valid information.
39
The use of different methods and perspectives helped me acquire
comprehensive set of findings. Furthermore I ensured that I implemented a
meticulous record keeping procedure and ensured clear interpretations of
data that are consistent and transparent.
The key issue is whether observed housing (dis)satisfaction in the Pelican Park
relocation project is caused by the level of presence or absence of the
criterion outlined in Chapter 2.
3.3.2. Reflexivity
Haynes (2012:72) notes that
An awareness of the researcher’s role in the practice of research and the way this is
influenced by the object of research, enabling the researcher to acknowledge the
way in which he or she affects both the research processes and outcome.
I constantly reflected on my actions, my position as a community member
and as a University of Cape Town, Masters of City and Regional Planning
student conducting research in Pelican Park.
Another important consideration pertains to the narrator’s story. The
participants were carefully selected for the purpose of answering the
research questions. Furthermore, the arguments presented in this report are
informed by my understanding and interpretation of the participants’. To
avoid any misinterpretation i went back to participants to get clarification
and find out if it is indeed what they meant.
3.4. Sampling Procedures
The selection of subjects to participate in the study is one of the key tasks for
any researcher. Researchers can rarely study (observe) every population of
interest to the researcher (Leary, 1991). Leary (1991) argue that some
populations are so large that it would be difficult to investigate their
characteristics. When an attempt is made to measure them, it would be
difficult to complete it before the population changes. Furthermore, time
40
constraints make it unfeasible to interview each and every Park. As such, it is
necessary to elect a sample that is entire population.
According to Ray (1993) the basic idea behind sampling is to learn about the
characteristics of a large group of individuals by studying a smaller group. If
all people were identical in every way then it would not matter which
individuals the researcher chooses to study out of a large group. The
researcher could use any procedure he wishes to select a sample. Further, no
matter how individuals are grouped, the results would always be the same.
However, this is not the case. Individuals differ across many characteristics
and these differences need to be taken into consideration during the
sampling process. In this research, I used purposive sampling.
Purposive sampling is a non-probability sampling method which allows the
researcher to use the research aims to select the sample (Silverman, 2005). It
is also referred to as judgemental sampling. Silverman, (2005) notes that
purposive sampling allows the investigator to choose a sample on the basis of
the participants’ knowledge of some feature interested in. Therefore, I
selected (n = 18) people on the basis of the fact that they live in Pelican Park
and were the beneficiaries of the project, these were originate from nine
households. They were selected through purposive sampling. An additional
(n=8) people were interviewed. These included (n=2) city officials’ (n=2)
architects, (n=1) town planner and (n=3) visitors to Pelican Park. These were
also selected through purposive sampling on the basis of their knowledge
and expertise on the settlement, low income housing development and
resilient cities. Altogether (n=26) respondents, were interviewed.
3.4.1. Socio-economic Profile of Pelican Park respondents
All the interviewed respondents from Pelican Park have lived in Pelican Park
for less than five years. In terms of gender, half the respondents female (n =
9).All the respondents are all working age. Majority (77 %; n = 14) of the
respondents have children with a small remainder (33%; n =4) having no
41
children. Some of the respondents (n = 4) are self-employed whilst the (n =14)
are unemployed.
3.5. Ethical Considerations
Mason and Bramble (1989: 353) argue the following:
Subjects must provide informed consent – subjects should be willing to take
part in the study after being informed of all aspects of the research that
might influence their decision. Subjects should have all the information about
the study that they need to make a decision about participating. They should
not be misled.
2. Subjects must not be coerced – subjects must not be coerced to
participate in the research. This principle was violated consistently before
ethical codes for research were formalized
3. Anonymity and confidentiality – subjects have the right to insist that their
anonymity as participants in the research be observed. They should be
assured that they will not be identified by their performance or the nature of
their participation.
Approval for the research was obtained prior to commencement of this
research from the UCT Engineering and Built Research Projects Committee.
Prior to data collection, participants were provided with an information letter,
which outlined the nature of the study and provided contact details for
further clarification of the study if needed1. It was stressed to participants that
their involvement was voluntary and they could withdraw from the research
at any time with no repercussions. Responses were confidential and no
identifying information was collected. Consent from the respondents was also
sought in the form of a written letter to the researcher.2 The findings are
reported in a complete and honest fashion without misrepresentation of the
information gathered from the respondents (Leedy and Ormrod, 2001).
1 The information letter provided to participants is in the appendix.
2 . Consent from the respondents is in the form of a written letter is also in the appendix.
42
3.6 Data Analysis
According to Leedy and Ormrod (2001), the researcher begins with a large
body of information but has to sort and categorize it according to themes
through inductive reasoning. The objective of data analysis is to extract and
summarise the useful information and draw conclusions. It involves
assembling, coding, sorting and sifting through the data and then narrating
the findings (Yin, 2012). The process involved comparing and contrasting
information so as to discover similarities and differences. The analysis utilised
themes in Chapter 2 and found sequences and patterns. This procedure was
critically reviewed with the research participants in follow-up interviews to
detect errors interpretation and bias. Furthermore, it was an iterative and,
therefore, labour intensive process (Grbich, 2007).
3.7. Conclusion
This chapter provided a clear framework regarding the procedure employed
for data gathering, processing and analysis. The chapter also addresses
ethical considerations related to my research. The research findings and a
detailed discussion of results are next chapter.
43
Chapter 4: Findings
4.1. Introduction
This chapter presents the findings from the data collected using the methods
outlined in Chapter 3. Research findings are also analysed and categorised in
accordance with the themes established in Chapter 2.
Before presenting these findings, I will discuss the historical background of the
case – the Pelican Park housing project – in the first section of this chapter.
This will lead to the presentation and analysis of the findings in the second
section. The chapter concludes with a summary of the chapter. It is to a
discussion of the background of the case under study that the chapter now
turns.
44
4.2. Background: Pelican Park Housing Project
Figure4.1: Adjacent neighbourhoods (Source: UCT library GIS, 2016)
This study focuses on Pelican Park, which has a number of new housing
projects being developed in it. Pelican Park is located 28 kilometres to the
south-west of Cape Town Central Business District (CBD), within the jurisdiction
of the City of Cape Town (see figures 4.1 and 4.2). Adjacent neighbourhoods
include Grassy Park, Zeekovlei, Philippi, Lotus River, Strandfontein and Ottery,
and it forms part of sub-council 23.
45
Figure 4.2: Pelican Park in Cape Town (Source: Google maps)
Pelican Park is zoned for Single Residential Zone 2 (SR2), which is medium
density residential. This zoning allows for uses such as a house, shops, day
care centres and small commercial activities, amongst other land uses. Upon
completion, it is to house more than 3,500 households and spans an area of
200 hectares (City Map Viewer, n.d.). It is largely a relocation housing project
with beneficiaries originating from surrounding settlements such as Ottery,
Lotus River, Grassy Park and the broader Cape Flats district (cf. figure 4.1).
46
Figure 4.3: Sub council 19(Source: City of Cape Town, 2013)
In fact, the settlement is made up of 60 percent of the old settlement of sub-
council 19 (Rushdi, Interview, August 2016)3. This means that 60 percent of the
beneficiaries of Pelican Park were backyard dwellers and residents ofinformal
settlements in surrounding areas. Sub-council 19 consists of Mitchells Plain,
Ottery, Retreat, Kalk Bay, Fish Hoek, Noordhoek, Ocean View, Simons Town
and Cape Point (CoCT, nd). The remaining 40 percent of the Pelican Park
3 Rushdi is a City of Cape Town housing project manager directly involved with Pelican Park project. He has
been involved since its conceptualisation.
47
population originate from outside the sub-council 19 and 23 areas (Rushdi,
Interview, August 2016).
Beneficiaries were selected from the housing waiting list on the basis of when
they had applied. Those who had the earliest housing application dates
within sub-council 19 were selected for relocation to Pelican Park (Rushdi,
2016).
4.2.1 The Pelican Park Housing Project: Conceptualised as a Mixed-use, Mixed-Income
Neighbourhood
The Pelican Park housing project, is one of several projects which seek to
address the ever increasing housing demand and to aid the eradication of
informal settlements. However, a number of barriers have impeded the
completion of the Pelican Park project, which was first conceptualised in
2007. Prolonged environmental impact assessments and land use application
processes have resulted in the project only being implemented in 2012. The
first two phases of the project have been completed. Developers are
currently working on the third and final phase of the project.
The Pelican Park project was conceptualised as a mixed-income and a
mixed-use development. The City of Cape Town (CoCT), as the owner s of
the land, opted to create a development that held a variety of uses and
housing typologies, including: BNG housing (2009 units), gap housing (700
units) and open market housing (315 units).
To deliver the houses, the City entered into an agreement with Power Group
Construction (PGC). The agreement, known as the “Land Availability and
Development Agreement in respect of a portion of erf 829 Pelican Park”,
Facilitated the sale of open market and gap housing sites to the developer,
that is PGC, at a lower than market price. PGC was required to install civil
infrastructure worth a portion of the total BNG subsidy paid to them by the
CoCT.
The state's housing Programme employed to enable the implementation of
the Pelican Park project was, and continues to be the Integrated Residential
48
Development Programme (the IRDP, as stipulated in the National Housing
Code, 2009). The IRDP enables the purchase of serviced sites for housing and
socio-economic facilities in phases (Government Communications, 2015). This
Programme also targets low, middle and high income groups. For these
reasons, urban development professionals and developers claim that the
Pelican Park project is the most integrated settlement project in the Western
Cape, despite the fact that it has yet to be completed (PGC, 2015).
These claims also corroborate the City’s intention which is to create an
integrated and sustainable housing project with many socio-economic
opportunities within Pelican Park. All of these claims and intentions, in turn,
serve to reiterate my justification of Pelican Park as an appropriate case study
for this research (see Chapters 1 and 3). Accordingly, let us turn our attention
to the different housing typologies implemented and envisaged for the
Pelican Park project before engaging with a critical analyses of these
planning interventions from beneficiaries' standpoints.
4.2.2. BNG housing
The BNG unit is a 40m² housing unit with two bedrooms, a combined
bathroom, a tap with sink and toilet, and a shared living and a kitchen area
(Figure 4.4). The BNG housing units remain in the ownership of the CoCT until
title is transferred to the beneficiary. They accommodate people who are on
the City’s housing database. This type of housing replaces the RDP housing of
1994 and it is delivered in single storey and double storey units. To access this
housing the beneficiary has to meet the following criteria established by the
state:
• Earn less than R3, 500;
• Must have never acquired a housing opportunity before;
• Must be older than 40 years;4
4 Human settlements minister Lindiwe Sisulu in 2014 declared that as from 2014, people under the age of 40
years will no longer benefit from BNG housing but rather take advantage of the Government finance linked subsidy scheme.
49
• Must be a South African citizen; and
• Must have some dependents.
Figure 4.4:BNG housing (Source: author’s photographs)
4.2.3. Gap Housing
For gap housing the beneficiary has to qualify for a Finance-linked Individual
Subsidy Programme (FLISP) subsidy (Figure 4.5). This subsidy scheme was
implemented in 2012 through an agreement between the Department of
Human Settlements and banks. The beneficiary must earn an income of
between R3, 501 and R15, 000 a month (Jeffery, 2015). Beneficiaries acquire
mortgage bonds through qualifying for FLISP subsidies such subsidies can be
used to purchase housing or serviced stands. The subsidy provides a once-off
subsidy payment offer of R87, 000 or less depending on the beneficiaries’
monthly income (Jeffery, 2015). Beneficiaries then pay the outstanding
amount to the bank over the specified period. Gap housing has better
finishes and is equipped with a solar powered geyser. FLISP aims to provide a
lower mortgage repayment amount for the total repayment period, making
housing more affordable.
To qualify for a Gap FLISP subsidy one has to:
• Be 18 years old or older;
50
• Be a South African citizen or permanent resident;
• Must not have benefited before in any State-assisted housing programme;
• Provide proof of monthly income; and
• Provide a purchase agreement of the house (Jeffery, 2015).
Figure 4.5: Gap Housing (Source: author’s photographs)
4.2.4. Market housing
The developer has to fill the market housing and the open market rate
housing with occupants (Figure4.6). These sites are sold on the open market
to those who do not qualify for a housing subsidy and for the provision of Gap
and BNG housing. For this housing opportunity the key requirement is that one
has to be able to afford the house either through cash or through a home
loan provided by the bank. The open market housing is open to any
interested stakeholder. Generally these housing units have bigger plots and
cost more to acquire. The properties can be sold as vacant plots or as
finished houses. These serviced properties in Pelican Park sell for more than
R400, 000 per house. To date, 150 of these units have been delivered in
51
Pelican Park. The houses are however not that popular as they stay long on
the market without buyers.
Figure 4.6: Market housing (Source: author’s photographs)
4.3. Evaluating Pelican Park based on criteria for beneficiary satisfaction
Assessment criteria for this study are established in Chapter 2, and they
include: enabling mobility; diversity; meeting economic needs; meeting
physical needs; meeting social needs; enabling access to basic services;
enabling access to public services; security of tenure; and environmental
resilience. This section will now go on to assess beneficiaries' housing
satisfaction in accordance with established criteria. Beneficiaries' housing
satisfaction, in turn, is derived from in-depth interviews, field observations and
other research techniques discussed in Chapter 3.
4.3.1. Enabling mobility
Oloefse (1999) highlights the importance of housing not being understood in
terms of its physical structures but rather how the individual perceives housing
at a community level. Thus it must link to the broader urban and natural
52
environment. In addition, residents must be able to commute easily and
cheaply into and out of their neighbourhood. The Pelican Park’s location
along Strandfontein Road, which is earmarked as a development corridor by
the municipality, is believed by CoCT project managers… to offer various
economic opportunities to the area’s current and future residents. Transport
facilities are easily accessible along Strandforntein Road. Buses and taxis
utilise the route frequently. However, opportunities and services within the
area itself are very limited. Pelican Park residents depend on a small
commercial centre that has Shoprite, KFC and other small commercial
services such as bakery, hardware and saloon. It has very few social facilities
and economic opportunities which pushes residents to commute to access
these facilities and opportunities elsewhere in the city.
Pelican Park residents have difficulty moving into and out of the
neighbourhood because, firstly, transport facilities are inadequate. The lack
of public transport facilities limits residents’ access to different parts of the
settlement and the city. City officials also acknowledge that transport is an
issue in the area. Rushdi (interview, 18 August 2016) suggested that the plan is
to implement CoCT Integrated Rapid Transport (IRT) systems through
Oystercatcher, which is a route that cuts through Pelican Park. The route is
parallel to Strandfontein Road. The route does connect to Strandfontein
Road, creating future development opportunities.
Overall, satisfaction with the level of access to other parts of the settlement
and the city permeability and legibility and access to commuting facilities is
low. In particular, respondents note that the existing transport networks do not
allow or make it easier for them to access services they need daily (Theresa,
Interview,2016) As Rushdi notes, the City's main priority is to deliver housing.
That is, the priority is to roll out the housing units and densify the settlement
since land is limited in Cape Town. The accompanying elements such as
transport facilities for example, are to follow (Rushdi, interview, 2016). They are
yet to be implemented in Pelican Park
53
Second, the hierarchy of road networks in the area is not well developed.
Jacobs (1993) notes the importance of having a variety of road networks that
help link an area to the surrounding areas. Great places are also created by
clear hierarchy of streets that help people find their way. It is evident that
Pelican Park has movement systems designed around car movement and
this does not create a sense of place. Having well-developed road networks
eliminates barriers to access. Put differently, having a well-developed road
network increases an area’s permeability. This is lacking in Pelican Park as
residents have to use the road for walking purposes, which they exclaimed is
dangerous due to speeding cars. There are no streets and footpaths in
Pelican Park. These elements are important and serve to enhance
neighbourhood accessibility (Jacobs, 1993).Generally, in Pelican Park
residents were dissatisfied by poor permeability on foot which resulted in
housing dissatisfaction.
Third, and related to the preceding points, there are far too few modes of
(public) transport available in Pelican Park. Respondents lack of adequate
public transport facilities in Pelican Park. They also highlighted that the lack of
transport poses a challenge for them as they had to travel once a week to
obtain groceries in Claremont. The majority of residents have to walk at least
4 kilometres or more to reach Strandfontein Road, irrespective of their final
destination. This is made worse by the fact that the Golden Arrow bus travels
once a day to Cape Town CBD (Candice, Interview, 2016). There are also
very few taxis operating in the area. The limited number of taxis has led to
facilities such as schools being inaccessible to children. Beneficiaries note
that they face challenges with sending their children to school, since schools
are located 10 to 15 minutes away from the majority of the houses. Taxis,
therefore, are an important element to add to the settlement since they
increase the permeability and accessibility of an area.
The absence of a well-developed road network as well as the lack of variety
of modes of transport has resulted in high levels of dependence on individual
transportation by Pelican Park residents. As Galster and Hesser (1981) note,
54
high dependence on individual transportation is a result of a lack of
adequate mobility infrastructure within a settlement. Such conditions are
associated with urban sprawl. Whilst the Pelican Park housing project fills a
great need for housing, it contributes to continued sprawling of Cape Town
through the establishment of a new housing project outside the CBD. It also
contributes to the degradation of the environment as its low densities may
not be able to support adequate transport infrastructure. For this research,
adequate transport infrastructure refers to the modes of transport for
example rail, bus whereas variety of mobility options is the number of routes
per given time for the given mode of transport. This then raises the question of
whether or not Pelican Park will ever satisfy residents since, as Galster and
Hesser (1981) argue, residential mobility is a crucial element of residential
satisfaction.
Respondents strongly noted how the new environment inhibits them from
visiting and seeing relatives and friends as compared to their previous
settlements. The closeness and immediateness of family and friends has an
impact on the production and maintenance of social capital. When
households are closely settled it is easier to foster social ties. With relocation,
relationships were broken due to separation effects. Those who originated
from informal settlements highlighted that, although there had been an
improvement in their living conditions they had lost their social ties. Erdeogan
et al. (2007) argues that social living conditions impact on satisfaction.
Positive conditions lead to higher levels of satisfaction. They further argue that
strong social ties are important and can hold more value than economic
aspirations. Thus feelings towards the neighbours have influence on
satisfaction. This is true with Pelican Park where respondents feel their social
needs are unmet. Respondents feel they do not have less access to the
support offered in their previous neighbourhoods and opportunities for social
interaction in Pelican Park. Aiello et al. (2010) argue that strong social
networks do compensate for the poor housing environmental conditions. Thus
the lack of this social/spiritual attribute contributes to housing dissatisfaction in
55
Pelican Park. Caldeieron (2011) notes that the presence of strong social ties
and networks, particularly in shanty towns and informal settlements of Puerto
Rico, provided platforms for people to support one another. He further argues
that with displacement of people by the state, social ties where broken
leading to residential dissatisfaction. With lack of safety for beneficiaries in
Pelican Park, residents feel local social detachment. According to Hourihan
(1984), such detachment leads to residential dissatisfaction since proximity of
relatives and friends to the new housing development is reduced. Balchin,
Keive and Bull (1998) agree that when a neighbourhood has a variety of
modes of transport, comparative advantage and housing demand in that
location increases. Lu (1999) further adds that the greater the accessibility,
the higher the satisfaction, and this means that accessibility is crucial for
settlements to satisfy occupants).The more legibility of the roads, the higher
the accessibility and vice versa. Residents in Pelican Park face challenges
with understanding their layout of their area.
4.3.2. Diversity
Economic segregation has been part of the South African housing
discourse(s) for the past two decades. It has been difficult to implement IRDP
in South Africa due to economic segregation. The idea of IRDP is ‘a pie in the
sky’ since the elite do not want to associate themselves with low income
settlements. Harvey (1978) notes that failure of integration efforts can be
attributed to the attitude of the elites. This encourages social divisions and
lack of integration, thus IRDP has faced challenges from these prevailing
conditions. Economic elites thus tend to withdraw themselves from such
neighbourhoods, thereby perpetuating the marginalisation of the poor.
Furthermore, spatial and socioeconomic segregation fails to contribute to the
compaction, integration and restructuring of the apartheid city, which is the
ultimate aim of the IRPD (Zhang, 2008).
The developers’ responses to the attitudes of the elite also account for the
lack of integration efforts. In responses to the desires and attitudes of the elite,
they fail to finely mix the different housing typologies. This has resulted in
56
further segregation of groups within Pelican Park according to income. As
Harvey (1978) adds, such practices create neighbourhood and city social
divisions. Although the Pelican Park project incorporates housing for different
income groups as stipulated in the Comprehensive Housing Plan (CHP),
problems are on the rise. There is tension and discontent amongst
beneficiaries within the area. First, beneficiaries’ dissatisfaction with their
housing results from comparisons by the beneficiaries of each other’s housing.
Beneficiaries’ compare and contrast the BNG and Gap housing units. From
the respondents’ perspective, Gap housing occupants acquired better units.
In accordance with the CHP, Pelican Park combines different housing
densities and types from single-storey units to double-storey units as well as
row and terraced housing. The Pelican Park project, however, has failed to
change, or challenge, the monotonous and predictable approach to
settlement layouts found across South Africa.
Population diversity leads to vibrant urban neighbourhoods. Fainstein (2005)
notes that diversity has different attributes that enable vibrant
neighbourhoods such range from mixed race and ethnic integration and
mixed use With regards to diversity, the Pelican Park population is not very
diverse. The settlement is largely coloured dominated in terms of race.
Findings reveal a lack of interracial contact in Pelican Park and residents
acknowledge this. This has contributed to residents’ dissatisfaction.
Second, dissatisfaction has increased for those residents living in the Gap and
market housing, because they pay more for services than BNG housing
beneficiaries, even though the various income groups have equal access to
the neighbourhood’s facilities and services. Cross-subsidisation is, therefore,
one of the main drivers of dissatisfaction in the Pelican Park housing project,
and it further serves to render the IRDP as an unattainable planning
intervention (Oxley and Smith, 1996). Nevertheless, it is important to note that
this dissatisfaction is not necessarily a consequence of the IRDP's prescription
for a purposeful mix of different income groups. 50% of respondents are
satisfied with the diversity of income bands. However, the other 50% is are not
57
satisfied, because there is very little racial integration within Pelican Park.
Pelican Park is predominantly a Coloured area.
One of the residents, Maissy Interview 21 August, 2016) notes:
Our neighbourhood could have been better and would make us feel like a
true South African citizen if there was a mixture of races and classes.
She feels that the manner in which houses are delivered fuels racial
stereotypes. White people continue to be seen as "the elite" who reside in
upmarket suburbs. Blacks and Coloureds, in turn, continue to be stereotyped
as "the lower classes" who occupy townships, and who have very few socio-
economic opportunities. This is related to the third issue, the lack of a truly
diverse mix of land uses. Pelican Park is predominantly a residential
neighbourhood. Jacobs (1963) highlights that neighbourhood’s function to
their optimum when they incorporate a variety of uses. She further posits that
mixed uses are the ingredients required for neighbourhood sustenance. It is
important to note that a neighbourhood incorporates residents with different
tastes needs skills and these people are brought close(r) together by diverse
uses. Lack of diversity is a contributor to low satisfaction levels in Pelican Park.
Govender (2011) acknowledges that diverse land uses enable satisfaction. In
Pelican Park limited land uses not only lead to dissatisfaction but also to
limited variety of cultures and skills (Jacobs, 1961).This leads us to the next
assessment criterion: meeting economic needs.
4.3.3. Meeting economic needs
Meeting beneficiaries’ economic needs is a challenge in Pelican Park. This
challenge has been identified in the BNG policy (2004) and the National
Housing Code (2009). Both acknowledge the failure of housing projects to
address poverty and basic economic needs. A CoCT housing manager notes
that the Pelican Park housing project, in itself, cannot address the economic
needs of the beneficiaries. Beneficiaries, in turn, maintain that the informal
settlements they lived in previously offered them to better economic
58
opportunities. Such research findings then suggest that the state's desire to
address economic needs by means of social housing projects is ambitious, at
best, and fictitious, at worst. Claims found in policy documents of addressing
residents economic needs through the delivery of housing (whether public or
subsidized housing) thus serve only to raise expectations that cannot be met
by the state. BESG (1999) highlights the importance of new housing
developments incorporating opportunities for local economic development
and economic initiatives. Thus housing must allow for small-scale service
activities (UN-Habitat, 2005). My research corroborates BESG’s (1999) findings
that the South African National Housing Policy fails to enhance economic
activities as it advocates for economic policy initiatives it cannot uphold. In
Pelican Park this has been a challenge due to the design of the structures
which does not enable small economic activities. Furthermore, 80% of the
respondents depend on their spouses or extended family members for
economic sustenance. Those employed engage in unskilled and semi-skilled
artisanal jobs.
South Africans, first, put immense pressure on Government to house those
who have been on the waiting list for decades. Second, the housing issue
and, inter-alia the land issue, is very complex. The ability to provide housing is
influenced to a large part by the availability of land (Project Manager,
interview, August 2016). A shortage of space and the unavailability of
inexpensive yet well-located land, places Government between a rock and
a hard place where housing delivery is concerned. Government is then
forced to undertake relocation projects on poorly located, but readily
available land as was the case in Pelican Park (Mabasa, Interview, August
2016). This occurs despite the Department of Human Settlements (cited in
Government Communications, 2015), stating that the idea of 'a sustainable
human settlement' state-funded housing projects must be implemented in
well located areas that are close to socio-economic facilities and
opportunities. Research findings demonstrate that Pelican Park fails to
address these 'location ‘and 'access' policy directives.
59
Generally the location of Pelican Park does not align with the requirements of
the National Housing Policy which stipulates that new housing projects must
be developed in well-located areas in order to address inequalities and
apartheid spatial planning patterns. Areas such as Pelican Park have been
termed poverty incubators as they are far away from opportunities.
Relocation to faraway areas perpetuates the marginalisation and
impoverishment of beneficiaries (UN-habitat, 2011). Residents express their
dissatisfaction by noting that the relocation to Pelican Park has had a
negative impact on their livelihood strategies. This is due to the fact that
Pelican Park is located far away from major economic activities and job
centres. Pelican Park is also characterised by limited economic activities such
as retail, business and mixed-use facilities, thereby nullifying, once again, the
policy intentions outlined in the IRDP. Beneficiaries, therefore, argue that the
Department of Human Settlements at the City Council could have done a
"better job" in ensuring the socio-economic sustainability of the project
through the provision of economic and employment opportunities before
relocating beneficiaries. As things stand, the beneficiaries’ economic
aspirations are unmet.
Munya (interview, August 2016) highlights that the housing problem is an
expensive problem to eradicate, and that the National Department of
Human Settlements is doing little to promote small local economic
development initiatives in housing projects. The City's housing project
manager (Interview, 17 August 2016) noted that they did not create an
economic hub for employment in Pelican Park. The development of
employment opportunities was a priority. Rather, the provision of decent
housing was the City's priority. Developers corroborate this standpoint by
adding access to decent transport infrastructure is one way to facilitate
residents ‘access to work opportunities. This has been confirmed through the
field survey, which highlighted that the only commercial activities present in
Pelican Park are a shopping centre with Shoprite and KFC as anchor tenants.
These small economic facilities are not adequate and residents have
60
expressed their dissatisfaction with the conditions of these facilities. Even
those who are employed travel long distances to get to work. Their transport
costs have gone up since they moved to the area. On average, residents
spend R700 - R1,500 per month on transport (Theresa and Candice, Interview,
2016). This has led some beneficiaries to consider quitting their jobs or
relocating to settlements that are closer to economic opportunities, which
are found in Lotus River, Philippi and Cape Town CBD, even if it means
returning to an informal settlement. The fact that some respondents are
considering a return to informal settlements just to be close to economic
opportunities, highlights the importance of economic opportunities when
implementing public housing projects (Govender, 2011). According to Tonkin
(2008) location impacts on accessibility of urban opportunities and underpins
social network and critical survival strategies.
Although well-located land can be expensive for low income housing, the
cost is outweighed by its future benefits and potential beneficiary
satisfaction. Such well-located housing provides beneficiaries access to
socio- economic opportunities. Well-located housing projects have the
potential to increase housing satisfaction as they alleviate poverty, which is
closely linked with housing satisfaction. Dewar and Uytenbogaart (1995)
advocate the importance of empowering the low income groups to
generate their own economic capacities. Creation of local economic
opportunities and trade are important for local beneficiary satisfaction.
Pelican Park conforms to the apartheid planning system where townships are
situated on the urban fringe. Khan (2003) argues that in such instances
economic opportunities within the CBD are inaccessible from such locations.
Furthermore, (formal) economic opportunities for self-employment remain
inaccessible to beneficiaries even within Pelican Park. This point is elaborated
on in section 4.3.3.1 below. However, for now it suffices to note that these
opportunities remain elusive in part because zoning regulations and
departure applications are believed to be, by some Pelican Park
beneficiaries, expensive. Financial security is closely linked to housing
61
satisfaction. It is attained through meeting residents’ economic needs.
Failure to meet these needs in Pelican Park has further contributed to
increased residential mobility as people seek economic means elsewhere
(Diaz-Serrano and Stoyanova, 2010).
Lu (1999) argues that there is a link between income and housing satisfaction;
high income groups can afford to make housing alterations to suit their
lifestyle. In the case of Pelican Park housing dissatisfaction is attributable to
having little to no income. The formally and informally employed residents in
the market and Gap housing projects in Pelican Park generally earn higher
incomes. The housing qualification criteria require some form of employment.
Their main complaint about the location is its distance from work
opportunities is the impact on their finances as a result of the longer
commutes. Those within the State assisted BNG houses struggle even more to
make ends meet. The majority of them earn R1, 800 or less per month
monthly. This is, according to Statistics SA ([StatsSA], 2011) and Tonkin (2009),
the basic income of informally employed groups. The respondents’ note that
they depend mainly on the child and disability grants. The child and disability
grant amounts to R1,500 per month. This is not enough to meet basic daily
needs. However, they are not the only ones having trouble meeting their
basic needs. Gap housing beneficiaries in Pelican Park exclaimed the
impacts of repaying mortgage loans is affecting their ability to pay for
electricity and water. This is contrary to the United Nations (2009) assertion
that related costs should not threaten or compromise other basic needs.
My research findings also corroborate studies by Tonkin and Muthambi (2012)
and Huchzermeyer (2011) that speak of the correlation between relocation
and high unemployment rates. The inability to meet basic needs, namely
food and clothing, in their new location has resulted in many beneficiaries
not being satisfied with the housing itself. Such high dissatisfaction levels are
common in low income housing relocation projects (Tshikotshi, 2009). Such
findings serve to set-up the next assessment criterion of my study.
62
4.3.3.1. Opportunities to establish small enterprises
Despite the fact that Pelican Park is located within the urban edge of the
metropolitan area, or precisely because of this fact, it has the potential to
host a number of economic activities, particularly for residents who reside in
the BNG houses. The field survey and observations reveal that beneficiaries
are undertaking small informal economic initiatives in the open public space
surrounding these house. Some beneficiaries have established Spaza shops.
Other beneficiaries have embarked on joint ventures with their neighbours to
open up a small shops, which sell home baked food and fresh produce.
Beneficiaries have expressed their dreams to expand their businesses in
future.
Generally, BNG houses have more space around them, which enables the
establishment of small economic activities (see figure 4.7). Some of the BNG
housing, as I note above, have used the housing opportunity granted to
them to generate an income. Challenges have arisen though as some
beneficiaries rent their houses to Somalians, who have, in turn, established
small house shops. This in itself has increased the population in the area, as
the Somalians often end up renting rooms to new tenants (Miguel, Interview,
2016). Reports by residents suggest that beneficiaries earn an estimated R500
per month from renting space to Somalis. Some homeowners return to the
informal settlements they lived in previously, once they find tenants. Tonkin
(2008) highlights that most BNG houses become income generating
opportunities for beneficiaries, because most beneficiaries choose to rent
their homes and move back to informal settlements or other housing closer to
work. Interviews with residents confirm that a significant number of
beneficiaries are going back to their old houses. Moreover, cases in Pelican
Park have been reported of people moving out of their houses and selling
them for as little as R20, 000.
63
Figure 4.7 Home Enterprises (Source: author’s photographs)
Opportunities to establish small economic activities exist for some Pelican
Park residents, particularly those who reside in the BNG housing. Very few
apply for land-use departures since it is expensive for them. Those who reside
in Gap housing have raised a number of concerns with regards to private
(and public) space. The outdoor private space is small and the general
design of the housing units limits the types of business activities that can take
place there (respondent A, resident, interview, August 2016). They have no
space for small local economic development projects. 100% of the Gap
housing respondents I interviewed maintain that it is inadequate to have to
pay for the house and get less space whilst others get housing with larger
outdoor space for free. This shows that that the design of the housing units
has a role to play in enabling local economic development. The BESG (1999)
and UN-Habitat (2005) acknowledge that the designs and regulations for
housing developments can either encourage or stifle the development of
small-scale manufacturing activities at home. The BESG (1999) further argues
64
that settlement layouts can either be a setback to or provide opportunities
for the emergence of mixed economic activities organically within a
settlement. The layout of the BNG housing in Pelican Park, by contrast, has
boosted beneficiaries' perceptions of the ability of their housing to help them
meet their economic needs. Thus, and to corroborate residents' perceptions,
80% the Gap housing respondents I interviewed note that they do not use
their housing for income generation purposes. Reasons for this include a lack
of outdoor space, as well as the inappropriateness of the house design, since
double storey typologies, in particular, do not lend themselves to spatial
reconfiguration.
4.3.4. Meeting physical needs
The CoCT Human Settlements department appoints consultants and various
quality management specialists to assess housing unit quality at various
stages of the construction process and upon completion. Developers must
adhere to the National Home Builders Registration Council (NHBRC) housing
standards. However, it appears that the PCG sought only to meet the most
basic standards required by the NHBRC. The quality of housing units has been
questioned by all the beneficiaries who have also expressed differing levels of
dissatisfaction with their structures. Cracked walls and water leaking into the
house are the norm for BNG and gap houses. Respondents believe that the
structural defects in the BNG and gap houses are due to the use of inferior
materials in comparison to the market housing (Saidi, 2013). The open market
houses have bigger sites and structures, followed by the Gap Housing and
the BNG respectively. The BNG houses also have different finishes compared
to the Gap and market housing. These differences can be noticed in roof
coverings, flooring, geyser, wall finishes and so on. The developer’s intention is
to make profit at all costs (Tonkin, 2008).
According to Turner (1978):
The importance of housing is seen through what it means as an activity as well as an
end product in what it does for everyone concerned, and above all for the users.
65
If the structure does not meet the beneficiary’s aspirations, problems arise.
Structures in Pelican Park do not meet residents’ aspirations. Residents have
firstly raised concerns with non-plastered internal inside walls and cracks
within the house, which allow water to seep through creating damp (Figure
4.6 and Figure 4.7). This damp has the potential to incubate dangerous
pathogens and diseases. In some houses, the ceilings are falling which raises
additional safety concerns. Beneficiaries have no idea how long their
structures will last. They also do not know if their houses can withstand storms
and heavy rains. They feel their lives are at risk and thus, their dissatisfaction is
heightened. The National Housing Code advocates for the delivery of resilient
structures, poor workmanship still prevail in state housing programmes.
According to Pacione (2002) in ideal situations relocation leads to the
betterment of beneficiaries lives. However, this is not the case for some
pelican Park residents. Their past and present living conditions are somewhat
similar.
Figure 4.8: Damp Walls (Source: author’s photographs)
66
Figure 4.9: Cracked Walls (Source: author’s photographs)
Lindamood and Hanna (1979) highlight that housing quality can be
determined by the subjective reactions of people. Bonnefoy (2007) argues
that housing quality assessment involves identifying structural problems such
as cracks and water leaks. These structural faults are visibly noticeable in
Pelican Park housing units. As a result, the beneficiaries are reacting
negatively to their structures and rating the quality of their houses negatively.
This is troubling since house plays a psychological role and can influence the
mental wellbeing of residents (Bonnefoy, 2007). Bonnefoy (2007) suggests that
it provides the last refuge from daily life. However, some of BNG housing in
Pelican Park housing has failed to provide refuge for the beneficiaries. Poor
building practices impact beneficiary health negatively. In Park, moulding
and damp are triggers to health hazards and complications such as asthma
and necrosis.
The housing finishes and, consequently, the houses do not meet the
beneficiaries’ expectations. The developer is yet to attend to the problems,
some of which were immediately evident when beneficiaries first occupied
the BNG houses. The contract between the developer and the beneficiary
states that the developer is to fix the defects within the first 30 days of
67
occupancy. It has become common for the developers to excuse
themselves from their duties. Beneficiaries also note that they cannot afford
to fix these defects themselves.
In the protection of occupiers’ interests or customers’ interests the NHBRC
protects beneficiaries from defects available in the housing unit (Government
Communications, 2015).Beneficiaries have not contacted the NHBRC and
have no clue on how such a council could help them. The NHBRC was
formulated in terms of the Consumers Protection 1998 (Act 95 of 1998,), to
address the housing consumer dissatisfaction (Government Communications,
2015). Their role needs to be utilised considering what beneficiaries are
experiencing.
Furthermore, respondents raised their concerns with the fact that no one
under the age of 40 (since 2014) can receive a new subsidised house
anymore. This is worsened by the fact that the rooms are small. The
constitution mandates that citizens have the right to adequate housing but
the government has to deliver this within the limits of the available resources.
However residents have interpreted it as the right to free housing. Hence, the
exclusion of the young from benefitting from BNG policies has caused some
controversy. This has resulted in increased overcrowding in beneficiaries’
households as older children are unable to obtain their own subsidised
housing from Government. Parents and children are forced to use the kitchen
and sitting room for sleeping purposes when they have visitors. All
beneficiaries had large families consisting of 6 or 7 members and more in
some households. The larger the households the more dissatisfied
beneficiaries were with room sizes and vice versa. Therefore, the one-size-fits-
all approach to housing design and provision needs to be questioned. This is
particularly true for Pelican Park, where there is a relationship between
housing satisfaction and housing population density particularly the
availability of personal space. 80% of the households interviewed expressed
dissatisfaction with room size. There is also a strong link between household
size and room size.
68
Overcrowding has an impact on people’s health and satisfaction (Goux and
Maurin, 2005). There is a strong relation between number of room occupancy
and an individual’s health. In Pelican Park, residents have reported fast
spreading of respiratory infections such as flu. Furthermore, Braubach (2007)
note that high density developments are characterised by overcrowding that
leads to noise. This combined with the lack of parks and green open space
leads to a reduction of one’s attachment to their community. The availability,
or lack thereof in this case, of adequate open spaces determines
perceptions of the quality of the environment. Sowman and Urquahart (1998)
argue that poor (social) infrastructure delivery leads to poor quality of the
environment. Lack of public space has been accountable for limited social
connections amongst residents (Bonefoy, 2007). This is a common
phenomenon in Pelican Park. Respondents expressed low levels of
attachment to their community and this, in turn, has influenced the low
housing satisfaction levels expressed in the area as argued by Young et al.,
(2004) and Grillo et al., (2010). Additionally, children who live in smaller
families perform better in school than children in larger families (Goux and
Maurin, 2005).
4.3.4.1. Privacy
All the beneficiaries were not satisfied with the level of privacy in and outside
their housing. The respondents note that the nature of housing did not allow
for privacy. Lack of privacy within human settlements often causes irritation to
the beneficiary. This in turn, can impact how people perceive their houses
visually and emotionally (Cooper, 1972). Pelican Park residents’ dissatisfaction
stems from the fact that the housing is semi-detached. The beneficiaries want
their own plots and, consequently, free standing houses with bigger yard
space for children to play in. The lack of space has pushed children to play
on roads putting their lives at risks. Beneficiaries were dissatisfied with lack of
social places for children to play. Children are forced to stay indoors to
prevent them from playing on roads, in the way of speeding traffic and bad
influences. Drivers always speed and roads lack speed humps and robots,
69
which puts pressure on parents to watch their children at every moment.
Toscano and Amestoy (2008) note that physical aspects of the house
contribute to satisfaction. Baiden et al (2011) also raise the importance of
house privacy which gives rise to higher satisfaction. This is true with Pelican
Park, with beneficiaries not satisfied with their privacy. Also adequate housing
space is crucial in meeting beneficiaries’ needs. Dissatisfaction with space in
Pelican Park corroborates with (Harris et al.1996) who suggests that adequate
space not only meets basic physical needs but also psychological needs.
With respondents not satisfied with the general quality of the units, Elsinga
and Hoektstra (2005) argue that the higher the quality, the higher the
satisfaction.
4.3.5. Meeting social needs and enabling access to public services
A sense of community is an important aspect of social capital and
strengthens relationships amongst households. Ross et al. (2010) argue that
sense of community can be attained through the involvement of
beneficiaries in planning and decision-making phases of a housing project.
Beneficiaries in Pelican Park have not been involved in the formulation of
their neighbourhood. According to Ross et al. (2010) lack of such involvement
is contributes to residential dissatisfaction. Although the Municipal Systems
Act of 2000 legislates community participation at a local level it is common
for low-income housing developments to exclude beneficiaries as is the case
in Pelican Park.
In Pelican Park, the local state and the developer had (and still have) total
control of the housing delivery process. Beneficiaries aspired to be involved in
the conceptualisation, implementation and project review phases, but forms
of participatory planning didn't take place (interview, Miguel, August 2016).
All the respondents expressed complete dissatisfaction with not being
involved whatsoever in the housing process. Residents argued that they
would rather have the subsidy and construct the houses for themselves.
70
Generally, beneficiary involvement in housing delivery processes improves
beneficiary satisfaction (Tissington, 2010). Amnesty International (2010) notes
that one way to guarantee beneficiary satisfaction is to involve the future
occupants. Excluding beneficiaries from such involvement leads to
dissatisfaction. Fainstein (2010) acknowledges that by involving the have-not
citizens in formulation and implementation of housing projects social reform
that enables them to share benefits is created. To help understand the core
reason behind housing dissatisfaction in Pelican Park, Arnstein (1969)
concludes that with decision-making power not being granted to
beneficiaries there is no redistribution of benefits. According to Fainstein
(2010) inclusive modes of planning and policy making must be done in
consultation with local community. Only with full public participation truly
great places come into being. Pelican Park residents are not satisfied with
levels of participation in project development. Amnesty International (2010)
notes further that it is essential to involve beneficiaries in decisions on house
designs and ways to protect their livelihood strategies.
With regards to resident consultation processes, local government was
responsible for the formulation of beneficiary participation measures. CoCT
project managers appointed a steering committee which was responsible for
obtaining a certain degree of input from future beneficiaries (Interview, 17
August 2016). The main role of the steering committee was to advertise and
notify residents of road networks and future road names. This was the only
form of input beneficiaries gave in the project.
A sense of neighbourhood ownership is acquired through beneficiary
involvement. Such beneficiary involvement is key to satisfying residents.
However, housing developments generally offer little to no room for the
affected community to include their own views. Instead a top down delivery
approach is followed. Such developer- or government-driven approaches to
housing delivery are not ideal in meeting beneficiary aspirations. In such
instances, representation of beneficiaries is necessary in order for various
social challenges to be adequately addressed. A sense of neighbourhood by
63
the Department of Human Settlements could give their input, but they were
not met. This is in Department of Human Settlement goals that advocate
participation in housing development. Beneficiary exclusion from involvement
is one of the main drivers of the poor location for quality in Pelican Park.
4.3.5.1. Safety
Neighbourhood safety creates great places and fosters sense of place. A
sense of safety improves quality of the environment. This is important in
evaluating the quality of the environment and how security impacts on
beneficiary satisfaction. Pelican Park is faced with high crime rates and gang
violence. Robberies during the day are a common phenomenon. The lack of
police presence in Pelican Park creates opportunities for crime syndicates to
mushroom in this young settlement. I even encountered a gang leader who
advised me to be careful as the neighbourhood is unsafe. However,
beneficiaries who had come from informal settlements are satisfied with the
level of security from hazardous weather events and uncontrolled fire
outbreaks. Aside from this, they aspire to return to areas which are safer and
closer to (economic) opportunities. Safety is a key factor that influences
housing satisfaction (Mohit et al., 2010). The perception of a neighbourhood
not being safe results in community dissatisfaction (Hur and Morrow-Jones,
2008). In Pelican Park residents fear crime and these feelings have negatively
affected their perceptions of their levels of personal safety. Crime rates are
high in Pelican Park. Residents are dissatisfied with the level of safety in
Pelican Park. The streets have cameras but these are of no use. The main
drawback is that one has to get a case number to apply to have access to
street footages in the event of a robbery. This is a tiresome process for an
application to be approved. Beneficiaries have to pay to see the video
which further worsens their financial situations. One of the respondents
(Interview, August 15 2016) claims that they moved out of their house for the
weekend and bought tiles and cement to renovate. However, in his absence
somebody broke into his house and changed the locks. They moved in and
are now staying there. Furthermore, there is a syndicate that lives in Pelican
64
Park. As soon as they see an empty house they break in and change the
locks on the door and they move people in. The new tenants pay rent. No
safe public space is available for parking for those living in the gap housing
(Miguel, interview, 2016). Their cars are parked in the road and being stolen.
There is a high car theft rate in Pelican Park.
There is a close link between crime, unemployment and housing. Stats SA
(2011) highlights that high housing unemployment increasing the housing
backlog. Combating crime through settlement development has been a
challenge and low cost has influenced crime rates upwards (Tonkin, 2008
and Saidi, 2013). This is due to inadequate policing and security measures.
With no employment and the general settlements, crime is prone to increase.
Stats SA (2011) notes low cost housing settlements are prone to crime; that is
where the highest crime rates are found in the country (Tonkin, 2008).
Residents note that it is common for children and youths to venture into drug
abuse since there are no recreational facilities and career boosting initiatives
for them to get involved in the area. Such facilities and initiatives are crucial
for any child’s development.
4.3.5.2. Enabling access to social services
Lu (1999) notes that access to public facilities such as schools and clinics
determines the degree of convenience in life and influences residential
satisfaction. Thus the more satisfied with public services the more influence on
residential satisfaction (Filkins et al., 2000). Thus, as the research findings show,
housing becomes inadequate if it lacks employment opportunities, schools
and other social facilities (United Nations, 2009). In Pelican Park one of the
key causes of beneficiary dissatisfaction, where social services are
concerned, is the lack of adequate educational facilities.
The primary school cannot cater for the increasing population in Pelican Park.
As development continues, more people are moving into the area. This puts
more pressure on the limited facilities. Respondents note that before
relocating to Pelican Park they were told schools were present (Candice,
65
interview, August 2016). It was only after relocation that they found out that
the school is already full. The school only takes 52 students in total. Schools for
children are needed for future projects as the absence of schools has a
direct impact on literacy rates, Unemployment and, consequently,
beneficiary housing satisfaction. These facilities need to be within close
proximity to the houses. At present, these facilities are located faraway.
Pelican Park is a crime and gang inflicted area, walking to school
compromises their safety.
In addition to employment opportunities being far, other services are also
located further away. These include health services, shopping malls, places
of worship and recreational facilities. Beneficiaries have to plan journeys in
advance to access these services. Even though there is a primary school in
Pelican Park it is inaccessible for many and this places additional economic
burdens on beneficiaries with school going children. They face additional
strains on their finances when they need to go to religious or healthcare
facilities (Govender, 2011). There are no religious facilities and health centre.
Residents have to travel to other centres when they are ill and this in itself is
expensive. Considering that the area has a poor transport network.
City of Cape Town project managers note that none of these facilities have
yet to be implemented in Pelican Park. However, sites have been zoned for
the future development for churches, schools, clinic, community halls, a
petrol station and other facilities. The clinic is to be developed in the next
three years (Rushdi, interview, 2016). However residents have no clue about
this revealing poor communication between residents and the city.
4.3.5.3. Enabling access to basic services
Access to basic Services play an important role in a human beings life. These
services are crucial for people’s day-to-day activities, particularly those who
rely on for safe heating and lighting purposes and for their home enterprises.
Half of the respondents are satisfied with their level of access to services. On
the other hand, half the respondents are not satisfied they cannot afford the
66
monthly services fees. This is due, to unemployment. This relationship shows
how employment and income have both direct and indirect impacts on
housing satisfaction. Beneficiaries in the gap housing units have the same
services BNG beneficiaries have. Unlike them, BNG beneficiaries enjoy
benefits of services such as water for free. BNG beneficiaries get 300units free,
which those in gap housing have to pay for. Their rates increased by the
observation that water leakages increase monthly water bills. Leaking water
pipes are an issue, particularly in BNG housing units. Such problems expose
the poor workmanship in the development as a whole. However, with the
supply of water there has not been an interruption in water supply even with
leakages.
Half of the respondents, namely those residents who originated from informal
settlements, have expressed their satisfaction with sanitation services in the
area. Their lives have changed positively as their units have an indoor toilet
and sinks. However, the other half of respondents were dissatisfied with their
sanitation services. This is attributed to the lack of geysers, which forces
beneficiaries to use cold water. These respondents envy those with geysers
especially in winter when the weather is not favourable.
On the other hand, project managers involved in Pelican Park give a
different view to concerns raised by beneficiaries. The process of preparing
beneficiaries to own housing is lacking in human settlement development
(Project Manager, interview, August 2016). Beneficiaries do not develop an
appreciation of the opportunity they have through their access to housing
(Rushdi Interview, August 2016). This, according to CoCT project managers
(Interview, August 2016), is because the beneficiaries are not mentally
prepared and have no conscience about the opportunity that they are
being provided. They lack consumer education, and this is needed for at
least 6 months before or after acquiring a house. It is the lack of consumer
education that leads to high dissatisfaction with housing. According to Rushdi
(Interview, 19 August 2016):
67
Beneficial education should include that you are being moved to a house now and
there are certain opportunities you will be provided with, this is how you must look
after the house, it is a different environment. You not living in a shack anymore.
Hence such a degree of psychological empowerment is important.
4.3.7. Security of tenure
Satisfaction is closely linked to having secure tenure and knowing you are the
owner outright. 50% of respondents expressed satisfaction with their tenure
and 50% expressed dissatisfaction. Gap housing occupants, suggest that they
had no form of tenure security to repay the bank loan. However those in the
BNG housing have expressed their satisfaction with their tenure. The
government provides title deeds for those receiving BNG housing. BNG
houses can only be resold after 5 years of occupation. Although the gap
housing mortgage is tied to the person and not the house, the house still
owned by the bank. This has hindered them from making improvements on
their houses, fixing defects and /or extending their houses. The respondents
concerns have been heightened further because some of them have not
received their BNG title deeds yet. They do not have ownership and therefore
cannot acquire capital to establish Furthermore, extent to which
beneficiaries can use their housing as insurance or. Although national housing
policies advocates ensuring security of tenure to beneficiaries on paper in
reality problems still exist with failure to satisfy and deliver tenure security to
beneficiaries. The BNG policy stipulates that access to secure tenure is a key
aim of National Housing Policies. Therefore the Department of Human
Settlements will implement various programmes to transfer housing stock to
the entitled beneficiaries.
Charlton (2009) argues that housing acts as collateral for home improvement
loans. In Pelican Park this has been limited lack of security of tenure as some
residents feel like they do not have secure tenure. In such situations
beneficiaries fail to use their houses as collateral. Perceptions of tenure
insecurity are common in Pelican Park and have kept home improvements in
the area to a minimum. Mahanga (2002) notes that it is common for residents
68
not to make home improvements even if they have the means due to
perceptions of insecurity. Home ownership plays an important role in housing
satisfaction (Baiden et al., 2011). Thus housing is inadequate since it fails to
guarantee the occupants’ legal protection against eviction (Chenwi, 2013;
Evans, 2013). Amnesty International (2010) notes that when people are
protected by the law against being unjustly thrown out of their homes, they
have secure tenure. Perceptions of a lack of security of tenure increases
people’s feelings of insecurity vulnerability and poverty (Amnesty
International, 2010).When residents feel they have secure tenure it
encourages them to improve their houses and environment (Amnesty
International, 2010).
4.3.8. Environmental resilience
The question of low income housing aesthetics has prevailed for many years.
The governments’ failure to address this indicates how housing is viewed.
Housing is still perceived from the developer’s point of view. Thus there is
need to bring housing specialists with vast experience and notable design
and development experience in the delivery process. This can help to create
sociable environments that enable quality of life for beneficiaries. According
to Adebayo (2000) low-cost housing in South Africa is organized along
straight lines. Hence it is monotonous and lacks both aesthetic and visual
appeal. Pelican Park is arranged in such a monotonous manner. The housing
lacks vibrant place making design concepts (Miguel, interview, 2016).
However, 50% of the respondents are satisfied with the aesthetic nature of
the housing. A visitor to Pelican Park mentioned that he enjoys the beauty of
Oystercatcher at night. This is one of the major routes in the area. He notes
how the street lights create a beautiful scene and he enjoys driving down
that road at night.
In terms of waste collection residents were 100% satisfied. They do raise
concerns though about their bins being stolen. This results in challenges
related to waste disposal. Environmental health, upkeep and cleanliness
contribute to housing satisfaction (Rioux and Werner, 2011). Furthermore
69
aesthetically pleasing areas contribute to satisfaction (da Luz Reis and Lay,
2010). Residents of all incomes do pay attention to cleanliness and neatness
of a neighbourhood. As for Pelican Park the neighbourhood is not
aesthetically pleasing and unveils the need for low income housing projects
to incorporate aesthetics rigorously.
4.4. Conclusion
The aim of this chapter was to analyse research findings against the criteria
established in Chapter 2. There are high levels of beneficiary dissatisfaction in
Pelican Park, like in a number of other State-assisted relocation
developments. The location is the main reason for such high levels of
dissatisfaction. It contributes to the high levels of unemployment
opportunities.
Planning resilient settlements requires that relocation projects be undertaken
in participatory ways. Failure to gain and incorporate the beneficiary input
into the initiative leads to beneficiary dissatisfaction as is the case in Pelican
Park. Various housing scholars argue that it is important to involve people in
the construction process of the housing unit. This adds sentimental value to
the house (Tonkin, 2008). Higher satisfaction levels with the housing units can
be achieved if the developer and the beneficiaries work together to deliver
houses. Unfortunately, the State and developers still drive housing
development.
Table 4.1 summary of the criteria for assessing the Pelican Park case
70
Assessment criteria
derived from the
literature review
Subsidiary research questions derived from
the assessment criteria
Summary of research findings
Criteria for satisfaction/
dissatisfaction
enabling mobility -legibility and
permeability,
accessibility to
community (Low
transportation costs,
convenience and
variety of modes of
transport)
-How accessible are socio-economic
resources for the Pelican Park residents?
-How accessible is Pelican Park to the
Cape Town central business district?
-How do beneficiaries feel about the
location of their housing?
-residents faced challenges in
accessing socio-economic
resources
-Accessibility is a challenge to Cape
Town is a challenge
- Beneficiaries’ are not happy with
the location of their housing,
Diversity -diversity of land uses,
diversity of population,
catering for the
disadvantaged group
and variety of housing
choice.
-Did beneficiaries have a housing choice?
-How does Pelican Park enable cultural
diversity?
-And how is integration enabled in Pelican
Park?
- Although choice of housing is
present beneficiaries had no free
will to select the choice they
desired.
-The area is predominantly one
race. This raises culture mixture
concerns. Diversity remains a
concern
meeting economic
needs
-Housing enabling
economic opportunities,
housing affordability
and market
accessibility, housing
subsidies and meeting
other economic needs
-How are Pelican Park residents using their
houses for income generation purposes?
-If they are not using their home for these
purposes, what prevents them from doing
so?
-What housing-related costs did
beneficiaries experience or are still
experiencing? Are these costs
manageable or not?
- A few beneficiaries own spaza
shops.
-house design precludes this
opportunity. Furthermore,
applications for land-use departures
are costly for many beneficiaries.
- Much of the expenses
experienced by beneficiaries are
transport related due to the
locational disadvantage of area.
Meeting physical needs. -adequate size, suitable
location, housing
quality, distinctive
character and other
physical aspects
-How satisfied are residents with the size,
quality and physical construction of their
home?
-What, if any, concerns do residents have
in relation to the structure of their houses?
-Are there any visible indications of
potential structural defects?
-100% of research participants
interviewed were dissatisfied with
the quality and physical
construction for their home
- Beneficiaries are not happy with
house finishes and quality of their
structures.
There were notable structural
defects on housing units.
71
Meeting social needs
and enabling access to
public services
-Beneficiary involvement
in project development,
safety, sense of
community, sense of
belonging and meeting
other social needs,
adequate and
accessible public
services and provision of
adequate and
affordable basic
services
-provision of adequate
and affordable basic
services
-To what extent, if at all, were beneficiaries
involved in the formulation and
implementation of the Pelican Park housing
development project?
-How do Pelican Park residents feel about
crime in the area?
-What influence do Pelican Park residents
have on their sense of place, belonging
and sense of community?
-What public services do the beneficiaries
have access to within walking distance?
-What public services do beneficiaries
require?
-How satisfied are residents with the social
recreational and educational services
provided in and around Pelican Park?
-Has the goal of providing basic services to
Pelican Park households been achieved?
-If yes are the beneficiaries satisfied with
the quality of services?
- Beneficiaries were not involved in
the formulation of their
neighbourhood.
- Crime is very high in the area and
residents feared for their personal
safety
- residents felt detached with their
neighbourhood.
- Beneficiaries had access to a
shopping centre and primary school
within walking distance.
- Beneficiaries are 100% dissatisfied
with service provision in Pelican
Park.
- the goal of providing such services
had been achieved in the area.
- Satisfaction concerns were around
pipe leakages which increased
monthly water bills.
security of tenure, - Secure tenure -What type of tenure is offered to Pelican
Park residents?
-Are there any challenges to securing
tenure?
-For BNG and open market houses
the tenure is free hold ownership
and Gap housing is sold as sectional
title units.
- Beneficiaries in Gap housing faced
monetary challenges to secure their
tenure.
Environmental resilience -Neatness, aesthetic
pleasantness, hygiene
and environmental
resilience
-What are the environmental challenges
faced in Pelican Park?
-Which environmental factors lead to
satisfaction or dissatisfaction with housing?
-Housing is organised in straight lines
which beneficiaries found
monotonous lacking both visual
and aesthetic appeal.
-Waste collecting and pollution
were factors that led housing
satisfaction.
72
Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations
5.1 Introduction
The overarching aim of this study was to evaluate the impacts of state-led
relocation projects on beneficiaries’ housing satisfaction. The National
Housing Policy stipulates that it is the mandate of the state to provide
beneficiaries with well-located land and housing, with provisions of basic
services (DHS, 2004). Relocation, as a housing strategy, has its impacts on
beneficiaries’ livelihoods. The investigation was undertaken by employing the
theoretical framework established in Chapter 2. This framework is founded on
housing satisfaction attributes from various scholars and scholars' arguments
became the criteria to evaluate the case study area.
The main research question asked: What are the impacts of a state-led
relocation project on beneficiaries’ housing satisfactions? And, what lessons
might we learn from the Pelican Park case study for future planning and
housing policies? In response, research findings demonstrated that
beneficiaries were not satisfied with their neighbourhood mobility. Despite the
efforts of the housing intervention to ensure that mobility is considered, needs
of occupants were not met. The study proves that housing satisfaction and
beneficiary aspirations are areas that still need to be attended by the state
and developers. The state's housing delivery efforts in Pelican Park deserve
applauding, since findings suggest that this delivery is adequate. However,
beneficiaries' needs are assumed from the outset, and these assumptions are
not questioned or challenged. Findings also show that the majority of
households had no means of income and depended mostly on social grants.
Home businesses helped improve beneficiary economic status. Some
beneficiaries had no business knowledge which is one of the reason they had
no home business enterprises. When housing policy fails to facilitate the
development of resilient human settlements the purpose of sustainable
human settlements is defeated. In sum, various central issues are affecting
low income housing. Housing satisfaction is an important indicator of meeting
73
beneficiary aspirations and improving their livelihood. Thus, feedback from
occupants and determinants of satisfaction are important to assess the
success of housing policies.
The aim of this chapter is to present answers to the research questions, to
suggest policy recommendations, and to conclude this study. Answers to the
main research question serve to introduce this chapter. The next section will
focus on revisiting the subsidiary research questions and providing answers to
these based on research findings. Research questions and answers are
grouped in accordance with the eight 'satisfaction' themes established in
Chapter 2. This will be followed by a section on proposed recommendations
based on lessons learned from in-depth case study methods. Finally, this
chapter will conclude with a reflection section.
5.2. Answers to the research questions according to their themes
5.2.1. Enabling mobility
How accessible are socio-economic resources for the Pelican Park residents?
In terms of mobility, transport opportunities are limited and residents faced
challenges in accessing socio-economic resources.
How accessible is Pelican Park to the Cape Town central business district?
Only one bus operates on weekdays; providing merely one trip per day from
Pelican Park to Cape Town CBD. Accessibility is a challenge. More public
transport routes and trips are required to enhance accessibility in the area.
How do beneficiaries feel about the location of their housing? Beneficiaries’
are not happy with the location of their housing, as they are located far
away from job and socio-economic opportunities. This increases their
transports costs and worsens their livelihood strategies.
74
Such challenges faced by beneficiaries result in beneficiary dissatisfaction
with mobility in Pelican Park. It is evident that mobility is still an issue that needs
to be attended to rigorously in state assisted relocation projects.
5.2.2. Diversity
Did beneficiaries have a housing choice? Three housing opportunities are
present in the area. Although choice of housing is present beneficiaries had
no free will to select the choice they desired. Lack of income and housing
affordability played a significant role in housing selection process. Had they
been granted a choice to select from their own will, their needs could have
been met. A lack of choice resulted in beneficiaries comparing their different
housing opportunities leading to tension and discontent amongst themselves.
How does Pelican Park enable cultural diversity? And how is integration
enabled in Pelican Park? Beneficiaries are both dissatisfied and satisfied by
the mixture of income groups the area. The area is predominantly one race.
This raises culture mixture concerns. Diversity remains a concern in low
income housing and requires attention.
5.2.3. Meeting economic needs
How are Pelican Park residents using their houses for income generation
purposes? If they are not using their home for these purposes, what prevents
them from doing so? A few beneficiaries own spaza shops. Most research
participants, however, have failed to utilize their homes for income
generation, because the house design precludes this opportunity.
Furthermore, applications for land-use departures are costly for many
beneficiaries.
What housing-related costs did beneficiaries experience or are still
experiencing? Are these costs manageable or not? Much of the expenses
experienced by beneficiaries are transport related due to the locational
disadvantage of area. Residents spent up to R1500 on transport forcing
beneficiaries to quit their jobs and return to informal settlements that are
75
close to socio-economic opportunities. Economic needs of beneficiaries
need to be addressed to uplift and enhance their livelihoods.
5.2.4. Meeting physical needs
How satisfied are residents with the size, quality and physical construction of
their home? 100% of research participants interviewed were dissatisfied with
the quality and physical construction for their home, while 80% were satisfied
with the size of their home.
What, if any, concerns do residents have in relation to the structure of their
houses? Beneficiaries are not happy with house finishes and quality of their
structures. Beneficiaries had doubts on the potential of their units to withstand
weather hazards. Furthermore the houses do not meet their needs leading to
dissatisfaction.
Are there any visible indications of potential structural defects? There were
notable structural defects on housing units. Evidently the structures had water
leaking into the house and cracked walls.
The housing units are characterised by structural defects raising poor
workmanship concerns. Generally, occupants had high expectations of their
physical structures particularly the quality of the house. Thus it can be
concluded that improvements to housing quality can enhance housing
satisfaction.
5.2.5. Meeting social needs and enabling access to public services
To what extent, if at all, were beneficiaries involved in the formulation and
implementation of the Pelican Park housing development project?
Beneficiaries were not involved in the formulation of their neighbourhood. As
a result dissatisfaction emanated from not participating in the project
development.
How do Pelican Park residents feel about crime in the area? Crime is very
high in the area and residents feared for their personal safety.
76
What influence do Pelican Park residents have on their sense of place,
belonging and sense of community? Breaking up of social ties with friends
and relatives through relocation and lack of community ownership achieved
through participation in project development led residents to feel detached
with their neighbourhood. This was further exacerbated by safety concerns
and other social issues.
What public services do the beneficiaries have access to within walking
distance? Beneficiaries had access to a shopping centre and primary school
within walking distance. Although the school was located far away from
houses, children still managed to reach school after a straining journey.
What public services do beneficiaries require? The area lacks health services,
shopping malls, places of worship and recreational facilities. Furthermore,
increasing population puts pressure on the existing schools, raising the need
for more schools.
How satisfied are residents with the social recreational and educational
services provided in and around Pelican Park? Employment opportunities are
located far, and other public services are also situated further away from the
area. Beneficiaries are 100% dissatisfied with service provision in Pelican Park.
The field survey unveiled that the residential area lacks variety of land uses
such as libraries, crèches and clinic and this dissatisfied residents. With only
one primary school and one shopping centre with few economic facilities on
offer the researcher concluded that the area does not meet the criterial of
enabling access to basic services established in Chapter 2.
Has the goal of providing basic services to Pelican Park households been
achieved? If yes are the beneficiaries satisfied with the quality of services? All
77
beneficiaries had access to basic services such as electricity, water and
sewer. Therefore the goal of providing such services had been achieved in
the area. Satisfaction concerns were around pipe leakages which increased
monthly water bills.
5.2.6. Enabling security of tenure
What type of tenure is offered to Pelican Park residents? And how does it
impact on their lives? For BNG and open market houses the tenure is free
hold ownership. On the other hand, the Gap housing is sold as sectional title
units, and these units are partly owned by beneficiaries and partly owned by
banks. In such a tenure environment occupants cannot make improvements
to their houses since they do not own the units fully. BNG occupants can only
resell their units after 5 years of occupation.
Are there any challenges to securing tenure? Beneficiaries in Gap housing
faced monetary challenges to secure their tenure. For BNG occupants
problems were around delays in the handing over of title deeds by the state.
Security of tenure still remains a challenge in low income housing.
5.2.7. Environmental resilience
What are the environmental challenges faced in Pelican Park? The area has
housing constructed in straight lines, which beneficiaries found monotonous
lacking both visual and aesthetic appeal.
Which environmental factors lead to satisfaction or dissatisfaction with
housing? Waste collecting and pollution were factors that led to housing
satisfaction. Residents were happy with their clean environment.
The results of the study reveal insights on the factors that determine housing
satisfaction in pelican Park. In response to these insights, recommendations
are proposed in the next section.
78
5.3. Recommendations
The following recommendations are directed at municipalities, developers
and NGOs. Recommendations are based on suggestions derived from the
literature review (see Chapter 2) and research findings (see Chapter 4).
Recommendations overlap across the eight satisfaction attributes.
5.3.1. Recommendations for social needs
In order to meet beneficiaries’ social needs, it is important to involve residents
in the project for the entire duration: from the project conceptualisation
phase to the implementation and evaluation phases. By doing so,
beneficiaries' needs and aspirations are channelled during the process
(Fainstein, 2010). Friedmann (1987) notes that social learning can help create
relational dialogs as a basis for mutual learning between planners and the
people. Thus planners must engage in collaborative and communicative
measures that create platforms for mutual learning (Friedmann, 1987). In this
case planning becomes a tool for innovation and action and less of an
instrument of control. Thus values guide planning approaches and how to
improve participation by community. Thus a two way process of sharing
relevant information is crucial for future public housing projects. The
involvement of all stakeholders in the in development should not only be
informing but involve communities in the actual construction process.
Safety and security are crucial to protect the lives and environment of
residents (Carro et al., 2010). Thus, the implementation of a police station may
assist in enhancing the safety and security of Pelican Park. The costs and
benefits of implementing such a public service would need to be explored by
the municipality in collaboration with residents and SAPS. Furthermore, it is
recommended that NGOs and residents explore opportunities to implement
community-based initiatives.
Research findings revealed that facilities are situated far away from residents.
Planners should put up legislative measures that push for the delivery of socio-
79
economic opportunities first before construction of the actual houses. Also
planners should ensure that crucial facilities in a neighbourhood
accommodate future population growth. In the event that housing is
delivered on the urban fringe planners should ensure that facilities are
adequate and aim to bring the city to the people and not the people to the
city. Thus housing must be safe, secure and resilient having integrated health
settlements that encompass socio-economic opportunities within proximity.
5.3.2. Recommendations for physical attributes
Findings unveiled the inadequacies with National Housing Policy. Thus
planners should formulate housing policy that in cooperates needs of the
occupants particularly their safety, quality of housing, housing units capable
of empowering occupants economically and not worsen their daily livelihood
strategies. Furthermore negligence from contractors and poor workmanship,
burden occupants in carrying out repairs to their houses. Such challenges are
not only unique to South Africa but rather a global south issue. Thus the issue
on workmanship needs to be taken seriously into account by the Department
of Human Settlements. The NHBRC must put enough pressure on developers
to deliver quality housing. With regards to warranties the NHBRC needs to
keep constant check-ups on the housing delivered. Also beneficiaries need
to be made aware of NHBRC as such an entity can protect their needs.
Rigorous and thorough quality inspection and monitoring is required for the
housing inspections to ensure poor work is not bypassed.
The current 40 square meter housing units need to be revised by national
government in collaboration with municipalities for the purpose of catering
for larger families. In the study households revealed the structures are too
small to cater for their large families. The size of units failed to meet
beneficiaries’ aspirations. Thus, it is recommended that the National
Department of Human Settlements capacitate municipalities and NGOs to
undertake housing needs assessments before construction begins and after
handing over for the purpose of ongoing learning.
80
Cheap housing and infrastructure should not be the focus rather quality is
important. Adhering to minimum budget requirements in the delivery of
housing results in the construction of poor quality housing made from
cheaper materials. This leads to the occupiers living in units that have leaks,
cracks and damp (Thwala and Aigbavboa, 2012). Developers should
consider the use of alternative materials such as clay and stone (CoCT, 2011).
Location is a huge determinant of housing satisfaction in relocation projects.
Thus well located land is one that is within the urban core, accompanied by
access to socio-economic opportunities. Therefore it is recommended that
within the project conceptualisation phase only land that is well located and
that can enhance peoples livelihoods be considered for project
development. In the case of existing housing projects with limited
opportunities the state and developers should facilitate the delivery of these
facilities and services to satisfy beneficiaries. In turn this reduces the transport
costs beneficiaries incur when accessing opportunities elsewhere. It is
imperative to bring the city to the people rather than bringing the people to
the city.
5.3.3. Recommendation for economic needs
Findings reveal that the majority of beneficiaries are unemployed. It is
important for small scale economic and informal economic activities to be
supported in housing projects (Baumann, 2003). The majority of beneficiaries
depend on informal economic activities. Findings reveal that house design is
a key contributor to resilient home enterprises. Thus housing policy should
incorporate this aspect and also provide adequate public spaces and
informal market opportunities. Planners and the municipality should recognise
the role of home based enterprises and the informal sector, and their
importance to the broader economy. There is therefore a need for planners
and government to coordinate policies and strategies that support this sector
in housing developments.
81
There is need to move the progression of realising housing as a right in the
constitution to using housing to improve lives of people. The majority of
unemployed occupants fall within the working age group, but most have no
tertiary qualifications. Therefore the Department of Human Settlements should
progress beyond provision of housing units to the betterment of people’s lives.
Also the CoCT must acknowledge that there is more to housing and it has to
encompass socio-economic opportunities that improve lives. Therefore the
city should formulate policies for housing development that goes beyond
delivery of housing. By moving towards housing provision it aids in addressing
pressing issues associated with housing such as, unemployment and access
to education (UN habitat, 2005).
A handful had managed to turn their houses into home enterprises. Thus it is
evident that the state had done little to support income generation activities
for low income groups. NGOs, the state and private sector should work
closely to capacitate and train beneficiaries with business skills and other
local economic concepts as ways of uplifting socio-economic survival. In this
way poverty reduces enabling beneficiaries to use their houses and be self-
employed in turn facilitating satisfaction. Furthermore, big commercial and
industrial services can be developed concurrently with housing construction
so that in completion of housing, commercial and industrial sites utilise local
labour.
5.3.4. The extent to which this dissertation achieves its purpose
The aim of this dissertation has been to evaluate the impacts of state
relocation projects on beneficiary housing satisfaction. A case study on
Pelican Park has been used to provide actual findings in accordance with
this study. The study had to assess the supposition that low income residents in
state-aided relocation housing are either satisfied or dissatisfied with their
housing environment.
82
The dissertation has managed to meet its aims. It has demonstrated that the
housing delivered by the state is failing to meet much of its occupant’s
desires, thereby leading to beneficiary dissatisfaction with their housing. The
exploration further demonstrated that a few residents were satisfied with
other elements of their housing environments, but majority were dissatisfied.
The study needs further research coupled with in-depth analysis on quality
control measures employed in low income housing. Also an assessment on
how developers deliver such low quality housing units and the state
approving the units adequate for occupation is essential. Additionally
interviews and investigations with the NHBRC is desired to understand the
institutions role in housing delivery process. The affordability and research on
bank bonds particularly those in Gap housing requires further investigation to
understand whether these bonds are actually affordable.
Lastly an analysis on place making principles used by planners need to be
investigated in order to understand the measurement which they used to
plan housing development for the area.
5.4. Limitations to the study
The timeframe within which the study could be covered, was limited. Timing
and safety concerns hindered acquisition of issues that could be included for
this research. In addition, many stakeholders could have been involved for
the richness of data of this research but time was a limiting factor. It was also
difficult to reach other stakeholders who did not respond to their emails. The
researcher faced challenges with speaking Afrikaans and thus it limited some
depth of information collected from interviews. Semi-structured questions
were rather long and received a few complaints.
83
5.5. Reflections
I feel that the research I am conducting should have been conducted shortly
after the construction of the first ten houses in Pelican Park. In doing so, this
would have helped to control the quality of the environment as opposed to
evaluations being conducted when people have settled in the suburb. I feel
it promotes the idea of working backwards. Rather, evaluation and house
delivery processes should run concurrently. Past, present and future housing
projects carry similar traits. Looking at the housing delivery history of South
Africa; it is amongst the top in the world in the provision of significant amounts
of housing to its citizens (Tonkin, 2008). Taking into account the past 20 years,
the country should have been past the research of housing but addressing
other issues. At present research would have been assessing how happy the
beneficiaries are, considering the fact that common happiness level had
been achieved through the 20 or more years of housing provision. My study
has unveiled the importance of post-occupancy evaluation and it is useful in
acquiring valuable information on how various stakeholders involved in low-
income housing can make changes to the current housing delivery
approaches. Therefore, housing should be tailored to elevate beneficiaries’
livelihoods.
The fourth and last day of data collection in Pelican Park I was walking alone
during the day and the road was quiet and empty. As I was heading to my
next house to conduct an interview I was stopped by a man. Immediately he
got interested with my research. He invited me into his house. We sat silently
in the house as I noticed guns on the table and told me he was a gangster.
He asked me why I had was walking in his turf and if I had gun. I pleaded for
forgiveness for committing no crime. I had to explain to him that I was simply
a student and not part of the cartels. Luckily, my UCT sweater rescued me as
it proved I came from UCT. He only granted me time for two questions. When
I finished my questions he made it clear to me not to come back again to
Pelican Park. What shocked me was that he confessed he had targeted me
84
thinking I was part of some syndicate. He further explained to me that the
current gang war that was taking place, was ongoing for the past two
months. The past three days of my surveys had been fruitful and the
neighbourhood seemed safe until this encounter. The last day turned into a
traumatic experience. On my way home, taxi drivers and my cab driver
corroborated that Pelican Park was one of the dangerous places in Cape
Town. Although I had an amazing study of my case I decided not to set foot
in Pelican Park again.
5.6. Conclusion
In conclusion, Chapter 1 presented the problem under study. The chapter
provided an overview of relocation and housing satisfaction. The chapter
explored issues on how government has initiated a number of programmes to
solve the housing crisis in South Africa, but the challenge that remains is
dissatisfaction amongst beneficiaries. On the basis of this hypothesis, the
main research question was established.
Chapter 2 comprised the theoretical framework that was used to analyse the
case study area. The theoretical framework was based on a review of
relevant literature. Through a synthesis of literature by various scholars criteria
for assessing housing satisfaction were established.
Chapter 3 outlined the research method and techniques used to acquire
data. In this chapter the research methods were explained. A discussion on
how these methods and techniques would be put to use for the study is also
explored. The chapter also explained the limitations of the method and
techniques used.
Chapter 4 presented my research findings and analysed the data using the
assessment criteria established in Chapter 2. Findings unveiled that the
housing had only managed to provide shelter but had failed to meet the
beneficiaries’ needs. Unemployment was a common phenomenon in the
85
area and beneficiaries had resulted to subletting their houses to sustain
themselves. For some residents their quality of life had even worsened. In
analysing this case a conclusion by the researcher was made that housing in
this area was just structures and four walls but had failed to meet the socio-
economic needs of beneficiaries. With this conclusion it is evident that low
cost relocation projects fail to meet the aspirations of beneficiaries. The
research findings in Chapter 4 were synthesised in this chapter. Lastly
recommendations were derived from the Chapter 2 and research findings.
These were presented in this chapter.
86
Reference List
Adams, J.S. (1984). The meaning of housing in America. Annals of the
association of American Geographers .74(4): 515-526.
Addo, A, I.(2016) Assessing residential satisfaction among low income
households in multi-habited dwellings in selected low income communities in
Accra, Urban Studies 2016, 53(4) :631–650.
Adebayo, P.W. (2000). Enabling the enabling approach to work: creating the
conditions for housing delivery in South Africa. In Urban Futures 2000
International Conference on Issues Confronting the City at the Turn of the
Millennium, Johannesburg.
Adriaanse, C. C. M. (2007). Measuring residential satisfaction: a residential
environmental satisfaction scale (RESS). Journal of Housing and the Built
Environment, 22(3): 287–304.
Aiello, A., Ardone, R.G. and Scopelliti, M.(2010). Neighbourhood planning
improvement: Physical attributes, cognitive and affective evaluation and
activities in two neighbourhoods in Rome. Evaluation and Program Planning,
33(3): 264-275.
Amerigo.M and Aragones .J.I. (1997). A theoretical and methodological
approach to the study of residential satisfaction. Journal of Environmental
Psychology 17: 47–57.
Amnesty International, ( 2010). Amnesty international report 2010, the state of
the world’s human rights, Amnesty International. Nairobi.
Amnesty International, (2010). The Right to Adequate Housing, Hakijamii
Economic and Social Rights Centre, Kenya.
Aulia, D.N. (2001). Research of Housing Location, Site Plan and Residential
Satisfaction. Presented in Proceeding SDPF Research, Jakarta.
87
Awotona, A. (1987). Housing Policy in Nigeria: Government Policies for
Housing Nigerias Urban Poor and the Working Class, Laudable Great
Expectations. Colossal Failure. Habitat International, 11(2) : 89-103.
Awotona, A. (1991); Nigerian government participation in housing: 1970–1980,
Nigeria. Social Indicators Research, 25 (1991) : 63–98
Babbie, E. & Mouton, J. (2002). The practice of social research, O.U.P, Oxford.
Background: Pelican Park Housing Project,1:40 000, University of Cape Town
Built Environment library, generated by Nigel Mashazhu, September 15,
2016.Using:arcGIS .version 10.1 Cape Town, south Africa:Esri,2012.
Bailey, N.J. and Manzi, T. (2008). Developing and sustaining mixed tenure
housing developments. Joseph Rowntree Foundation. York.
Balchin, P.N., Kieve, J.L. and Bull, G.H. (1988). The Market and the Location of
Urban Land Uses. In Urban Land Economics and Public Policy .Macmillan
Education .United Kingdom.
Baumann, T. (2003). Housing policy and poverty in South Africa. Housing
policy and practice in post-apartheid South Africa, 85-114.
Beamish, J.O., Carucci Goss, R. and Emmel, J. (2001). Lifestyle influences on
housing preferences. Housing and Society, 28(1-2):1-28.
Berkoz, L., & Kellekci, O. L. (2007). Mass housing: Residents satisfaction with
their housing and environment. Open House International, 32(1) : 41-49.
88
Berkoz, L., Turk, Ş.Ş. and Kellekci, Ö.L. (2009). Environmental quality and user
satisfaction in mass housing areas: the case of Istanbul. European Planning
Studies. (17) 1.
Blanche, M.T., Durrheim, K. and Painter, D. (2006). Research in practice:
Applied methods for the social sciences. Juta and Company Ltd. Cape
Town.
Bless, C. & Higson-Smith, C. (1995). Fundamentals of social research methods:
An African perspective. Juta and Company Ltd, Cape Town.
Bonauto, M., Murray, S.M. and Robinson, B.(1999). Freedom to Marry for
Same-Sex Couples: The Reply Brief of Plaintiffs Stan Baker et. al. in Baker et. al.
v. State of Vermont, The. Mich. J. Gender & L., 6:1.
Bonnefoy, X. (2007). Inadequate housing and health: an overview, Int. J.
Environment and Pollution,30 (3/4): 411–429.
Brand, J. & Orfield, S. (2004). Design success: Occupancy research and
building performance, viewed, http://www.informedesign.umn.edu.[2 June
2016].
Braubach, M. (2007). Residential conditions and their impact on residential
environment satisfaction and health: results of the WHO large analysis and
review of European housing and health status (LARES) study. International
Journal of Environment and Pollution, 30(3-4):384-403.
BREAKING NEW GROUND, (2004). A comprehensive plan for the development
of sustainable human settlements. South Africa, viewed,
http:///www.gov.za/housing.htm [2 June 2016].
89
Bromley, D.B.(1986). The case-study method in psychology and related
disciplines. John Wiley & Sons. Michigan.
Buys, L. and Miller .E .(2012). Residential satisfaction in inner urban higher-
density Brisbane, Australia: Role of dwelling design, neighbourhood and
neighbours. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 55(3): 319–
338.
Caldieron, J.(2011). Residential satisfaction in la perla informal neighborhood,
San Juan, Puerto Rico. OIDA International Journal of Sustainable
Development, 2(11):77-84.
Campbell, A. Converse, P.E. & Rogers, W. J. (1976). The quality of American
life: Perceptions, evaluations, and satisfaction, Russell Sage Foundation, New
York.
Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE), (2000). The Human Right to
Adequate Housing 1945 to 1999: Chronology of United Nations Activity.
United Nations, Washington DC.
Chapman, D.W. and Lombard, J.R.(2006). Determinants of neighborhood
satisfaction in fee-based gated and nongated communities. Urban affairs
review, 41(6):769-799.
Charlton, S (2014). Public housing in Johannesburg. Chapter in Harrison, P;
Todes, A; Gotz, G and Wray, C (eds) Changing space, changing city.
Johannesburg after Apartheid. Wits Press. Johannesburg.
Charlton, S. & Kihato, C. (2006). Reaching the poor? An analysis of the
influence on the evolution of South Africa's housing Programme. In U. Pillay, R.
Tomlinson, & J. du Toit (Eds.). Democracy and Delivery: Urban Policy in South
Africa. HSRC Press. Cape Town.
90
Charlton, S. (2004). An Overview of the Housing Policy and Debates
Particularly in Relation to Women (or Vulnerable Groupings), centre for study
of violence and reconciliation. HSRC Press. Cape Town.
City Map Viewer, n.d. viewed, http://emap.capetown.gov.za/egispbdm/
[13 August 2 016].
City of Cape Town. (2013). 2011 Census : Subcouncil 019, City of Cape Town.
Cape Town.
Cohen, D.A., Mason, K., Bedimo, A., Scribner, R., Basolo, V. and Farley, T.A.
(2003). ‘Neighborhood physical conditions and health’, American Journal of
Public Health, 93( 3): 467–471.
Cohen, D.K., Raudenbush, S.W. and Ball, D.L., 2003. Resources, instruction,
and research. Educational evaluation and policy analysis, 25(2), pp.119-142.
Cohen, L. & Manion, L. (2002). Research Methods In Education. Croom Helm.
London.
da Luz Reis, A.T. and Lay, M.C.D. (2010). Internal and external aesthetics of
housing estates. Environment and Behavior, 42(2):271-294.
De Vaus, D. (2002). Analyzing social science data: 50 key problems in data
analysis. Sage. Queensland.
Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. (Eds.) (2005). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative
Research, Third Edition. Sage. London & New York.
Department of Housing, (2004). Breaking New Ground: A comprehensive
plan for the development of sustainable human settlements. Department of
Housing. Pretoria.
91
Department of Human Settlements, (2009). National Housing Code, viewd,
http://www.dhs.gov.za/?q=content/national-housing-code-2009 (30
September 2016).
Dewar, D. and Uytenbogaardt, R.S. (1995). Creating Vibrant Places to Live:
An Urban Primer. Headstart developments, Cape Town.
Diaz-Serrano, L. and Stoyanova, A.P.(2010). Mobility and housing satisfaction:
an empirical analysis for 12 EU countries. Journal of Economic Geography,
10(5):661-683.
Duneier, M. (1999) Sidewalk. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. New York.
Elsinga, M. and Hoekstra, J.(2005). Homeownership and housing satisfaction.
Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 20(4):401-424.
Erdogan, N., Akyol, A., Ataman, B. and Dokmeci, V.(2007). Comparison of
urban housing satisfaction in modern and traditional neighborhoods in Edirne,
Turkey. Social Indicators Research, 81(1):127-148.
Evans-Pritchard, E.E. (2013). Social anthropology. Routledge. London.
Eyiah-Botwe, E. (2015). Assessing Housing Project End-Users Satisfaction in
Ghana: A Case Study of SSNIT Housing Flats in Asuoyeboa-Kumasi, Civil and
Environmental Research, 7, (3).
Fainstein, S.S. (2005). Planning theory and the city. Journal of Planning
Education and Research, 25(2):121-130.
Fainstein, S.S. (2010). The just city. Cornell University Press. New York.
92
Filkins, R., Allen, J.C. and Cordes, S. (2000). Predicting community satisfaction
among rural residents: An integrative model. Rural Sociology, 65(1):72-86.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five Misunderstanding about Case-study Research.
Qualitative Inquiry .12(2): 219—245.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2011). Case Study. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.) the Sage
Handbook of Qualitative Research, 4th Edn. Sage.London & New York:.
301—316.
Fuller-Thomson, E., Hulchanski, J.D. and Hwang, S. (2000). The housing/health
relationship: what do we know?’, Reviews on Environmental Health,15(1–
2):109–133.
Galster, G .C. & Hesser, G.W. (1981). Residential satisfaction: Compositional
and contextual correlates. Environment and behaviour 13(6):735-758.
Galster, G. (1987). Identifying the correlates of dwelling satisfaction: An
empirical critique. Environment and Behaviour 19(5): 539-568.
Galster, G.C., Hesser, G.W. (198 I). Residential satisfactions compositional and
contextual correlates. Environ. Behaviour 13 (6) : 735-758.
Given, L.M. ed.(2008). The Sage encyclopedia of qualitative research
methods. Sage Publications. London.
Goux, D. and Maurin, E. (2005). The effect of overcrowded housing on
children's performance at school. Journal of Public economics, 89(5): 797-819.
Govender. G.B ,2011. An evaluation of housing strategy in South Africa for the
creation of sustainable human settlements: a case study of the eThekwini
region, University of KwaZulu-Natal. Durban.
93
Government Communications, 2015, Pocket Guide to South Africa 2014/15.
12th edn. Government Communications. Pretoria.
Grillo, G., Turi, A., Licciulli, F., Mignone, F., Liuni, S., Banfi, S., Gennarino, V.A.,
Horner, D.S., Pavesi, G., Picardi, E. and Pesole, G. (2010). UTRdb and UTRsite .a
collection of sequences and regulatory motifs of the untranslated regions of
eukaryotic mRNAs. Nucleic acids research, 38:D75-D80.
Grzeskowiak, S., Sirgy, M.J. and Widgery, R.(2003). Residents' satisfaction with
community services: Predictors and outcomes. Journal of Regional Analysis
and Policy, 33(2):1-36.
Hancock, B., Ockleford, E. and Windridge, K.(2009). An introduction to
qualitative research. Trent focus group. Nottingham.
Hanna, S.D. and Lindamood, S. (1979) . Housing preferences of blacks and
whites in Montgomery, Alabama. American Association of Housing
Educators. Alabama.
Harris, P.B., Brown, B.B. and Werner, C.M. (1996). Privacy regulation and place
attachment: Predicting attachments to a student family housing facility.
Journal of Environmental Psychology, 16(4): 287-301.
Harvey, D. (1978). The urban process under capitalism: a framework for
analysis. International journal of urban and regional research, 2(1‐4):101-131.
Haynes, K. (2012). Reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative organizational
research: Core methods and current challenges.72-89.
Hornby, A.S. (2005).Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English,
7th Edition. Oxford University Press, Cape Town.
94
Hourihan, K.(1984). Context-Dependent Models of Residential Satisfaction An
Analysis of Housing Groups in Cork, Ireland. Environment and behavior,
16(3):369-393.
Huchzermeyer, M. (2011). Cities with ‘Slums’: From informal settlement
eradication to a right to the city in Africa . SA, University of Cape Town Press.
Claremont.
Hur, M. and Morrow-Jones, H.(2008). Factors that influence residents'
satisfaction with neighbourhoods. Environment and Behaviour. 40 (5) 619-635.
Ilesanmi, A. (2010). ‘Post-occupancy evaluation and residents’ satisfaction
with public housing in Lagos, Nigeria’. Journal of Building Appraisal, 6 : 153–
169.
Ilesanmi, A.O. (2010). Urban sustainability in the context of Lagos mega-city.
Journal of Geography and Regional Planning, 3(10):240.
Inah S. A. Yaro M. A. Agbor, E. A. Ukene, D. (2014). Residential Housing
Satisfaction of the Urban Poor in Calabar Metropolis, Nigeria. Architecture
Research. 4(1A): 1-8.
Inah, S. A., Yaro, M. A., Agbor, E. A., and Ukene, D. (2014). “Residential
housing satisfaction of the urban poor in Calabar Metropolis, Nigeria.” Archit.
Res., 4(1A) :1–8.
Jacobs, J.M. (1993). The city unbound: qualitative approaches to the city.
Urban Studies, 30(4-5):827-848.
Jacobs, K. (2006). Discourse Analysis and its Utility for Urban Policy Research.
Urban Policy and Research. 24(1): 39—52.
95
James, P., Tzoulas, K., Adams, M.D., Barber, A., Box, J., Breuste, J., Elmqvist, T.,
Frith, M., Gordon, C., Greening, K.L. and Handley, J. (2009). Towards an
integrated understanding of green space in the European built environment.
Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 8(2):65-75.
Jha, A. K. (2010). Safer Homes, Stronger Communities: A Handbook for
Reconstructing after Natural Disasters, World Bank, Washington DC.
Jiboye A.D. (2012): Post-Occupancy Evaluation of Residential Satisfaction in
Lagos, Nigeria: Feedback for Residential Improvement. Frontiers of
Architectural Research ,1 : 236-243
Jones, E. & Somekh, B. (2005) .Observation, in B. Somekh & C. Lewin
(eds) Research Methods in the Social Sciences London: Sage,138-145.
Kabir,A .H .M .(2002).development and human rights:litigating the right to
adequate housing, Asia-Pacific journal on Human Rights and the Law 1:97-
119
Kearns, A., Hiscock, R., Ellaway, A. and Macintyre, S. (2000). Beyond four walls.
The psycho-social benefits of home: evidence from West Central Scotland’,
Housing Studies,15(3):387–410
Kearns, A., Hiscock, R., Ellaway, A. and Macintyre, S.(2000). ‘Beyond four
walls’. The psycho-social benefits of home: Evidence from West Central
Scotland. Housing studies, 15(3):387-410.
Kelleke, O.L. and Berkoz, L. (2006). Mass Housing: User Satisfaction in Housing
and its Environment in Istanbul. European Journal of Housing Policy, 6(1) : 77-
99.
Kennedy, D. (2009). A Critique of Adjudication [fin de siècle]. Harvard
University Press. Harvard.
96
Khan, F. (2003). Supporting People‘s Housing Initiatives‖: Housing Policy and
Practice in Post-Apartheid South Africa, Sandown: Heinemann, South Africa.
Khan, F.(2003). Continuities, ambiguities and contradictions: the past, present
and (possible) future of housing policy and practice in South Africa. Housing
Policy and Practice in Post-Apartheid South Africa. Sandown: Heinemann,
1-76.
Kinsey, J. and Lane, S.(1983). Race, housing attributes, and satisfaction with
housing. Housing and society, 10(3):98-116.
Konadu-Agyemang, K. (2001). A survey of housing conditions and
characteristics in Accra, an African city. Habitat International, 25(1): 15-34.
L Chenwi 2013. The right to adequate housing in the African regional human
rights system: Convergence or divergence between the African Commission
and South African approaches, 17 Law, Democracy and Development 342-
362 .
Latkin, C.A. and Curry, A.D. (2003). Stressful neighbourhoods and depression:
a prospective study of the impact of neighbourhood disorder. Journal of
health and social behaviour, 34-44.
Latkin, C.A. and Curry, A.D. (2003). Stressful neighbourhoods and depression:
a prospective study of the impact of neighbourhood disorder, Journal of
Health and Social Behaviour, 44: 34–44.
Leedy, P.D. and Ormrod, J.E. (2001). Practical research: Planning and design.
Prentice-Hall. New Jersey.
Leedy, P.D.(1997). Pracfical research: Planning and design, 6th edn., Merrill.
London.
97
Lu, M. (1999). Determinants of residential Satisfaction. Growth & Change
30(2): 264-288.
Mackenbach, J.P. and Howden-Chapman, P. (2002). ‘Houses,
neighbourhoods and health’, European Journal of Public Health, 12: 161, 162.
Mahanga, M.M. (2002). Urban Housing and Poverty Alleviation in Tanzania.
Dar Es Salaam University Press Limited: Uvumbuzi Road. Dar Es Salaam.
Mason, E.J. and Bramble, W.J. (1989). Understanding and conducting
research: Applications in education and the behavioural sciences. McGraw-
Hill Companies. New York.
Michelson, W. (1977). Environment, Choice, Human Behaviour, and
Residential Satisfaction. Oxford University Press. New York.
Mohit, M. A., Ibrahim, M., & Rashid, Y. R. (2010). Assessment of residential
satisfaction in newly designed public low-cost housing in Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia. Habitat International (34) : 10.
Morris, E.W. Crull, S.R. & Winter, M. (1976). Housing norms, housing satisfaction
and the propensity to move. Journal of Marriage and Family. 39:309-320.
Morrison, N. (2003). Neighbourhoods and Social Cohesion: Experiences from
Europe. International Planning Studies. 8(2):115 -138.
Morrison, P.S. (1999). The inner city apartment versus the suburb: housing sub-
markets in New Zealand city. Urban Studies. 36(2): 377-397.
Muoghalu, L. N. (1984). Subjective Indices of Housing Satisfaction as Social
Indicators for Planning Public Housing in Nigeria. Journal of Social Indicators
Research. 15 (2):145-164.
98
Oladapo, A. (2006). A Study of Tenant Maintenance Awareness,
Responsibility and Satisfaction in Institutional Housing in Nigeria. International
Journal of Strategic Property Management, (10) : 217-231.
Orfield, S.J. and Brand, J.L. (2004). Better sound solutions: Applying occupant
and building performance measurement and design to improve office
acoustics. American Society of Interior Designers. Washington DC.
Oxley, M. and Smith, J.(1996). Housing policy and rented housing in Europe.
Taylor & Francis.London.
Pacione, M. (2002). Britain's cities: geographies of division in urban Britain. ed.
Routledge. London.
Patterson, L. and Shannon, P.(1993). Reflection, inquiry, action. Teachers are
researchers: Reflection and action, 7-11.
Payne, G. (1984). Low Income Housing in Developing World: The Role of Site
and Services and Settlement Upgrading, Wiley, Chichester.
Payne, G. (2002). Land, Rights and Innovation: Improving Tenure Security for
the Urban Poor. ITDG Publishing. London.
Potter, J. and Cantarero, R. (2006). How does increasing population and
diversity affect resident satisfaction? A small community case study.
Environment and Behavior, 38(5):605-625.
Pottie, D. (2004). Local government and housing in South Africa: managing
demand and enabling markets. Development in Practice, 14(5):606-618.
PROPERTYWHEEL, (2013). City hands over first gap and open market houses in
phase 1 of Pelican Park, viewed, http://propertywheel.co.za/2013/06/city-
99
hands-over-first-gap-and-open-market-houses-in-phase-1-of-pelican-park/
[12 May 2016].
Ramashamole, B. (2010).Sustainable Housing Development in Post-Apartheid,
University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.
Ray, R.E. (1993). The Practice of Theory: Teacher Research in Composition.
National Council of Teachers of English, Urbana.
Relph, E. (1976) Place and Placelessness, Pion, London.
Rioux L and Werner C (2011) Residential satisfaction among aging people
living in place. Journal of Environmental Psychology 31(2): 158–169
Rioux, L. and Werner, C. (2011). Residential satisfaction among aging people
living in place. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 31(2):158-169.
Ross, A.G., Shochet, I.M. and Bellair, R. (2010). The role of social skills and
school connectedness in preadolescent depressive symptoms. Journal of
Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 39(2):269-275.
Saidi, M. (2013). No place like HOME: specialist housing services for people
with mental health problems, outcomes, movements and experiences, The
London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE)).London.
Salleh, A.G. (2008). Neighborhood factors in private low-cost housing in
Malaysia. Habitat Int., 32: 485-493.
Schutt, R.K. (2011). Investigating the social world: The process and practice of
research. Pine Forge Press. New York.
100
Sirgy, M.J. and Cornwell, T. (2002). How neighborhood features affect quality
of life. Social indicators research, 59(1):79-114.
Smit, D. (2006). Review of the International Experience with Inclusionary
Housing Programmes: Implications for South Africa, Department of Housing,
South Africa.
South Norfolk Council. (2012). South Norfolk Place-Making Guide
Supplementary Planning Document September 2012, South Norfolk Council.
South Norfolk
Sowman, M. and Urquhart, P. (1998). A place called home: Environmental
issues and low-cost housing. University of Cape Town Press. Cape Town.
Theodori, G.L. (2001) Examining the Effects of Community Satisfaction and
Attachment on Individual Well-being, Rural Sociology, 4(66) : 618-628.
Thwala, W.D. & Aigbavboa, O. (2012). An appraisal of housing satisfaction in
South Africa low-income housing scheme. The International Journal of
Construction Management. 12 (1): 1-21.
Tissington. K. (2010). A Review of Housing Policy andDevelopment in South
Africa since 1994. Socio-Economic Rights Institute of South Africa (SERI).
Johannesburg.
Tjahyono, Y. P. S. (2004). Perumahan bagi masyarakat berpenghasilan
menengah kebawah di perkotaan (Sumbang saran bagi kemajuan Perum
Perumnas pada ultah ke-29), Dimensi Teknik Arsitektur. 32 (2):171-178.
Toscano, E.V., & Amestoy, V.A., (2008). The relevance of social interactions on
housing satisfaction, Social Indicators Research, 86(2): 257-274.
101
Trochim, W. (2006). The Research Methods Knowledge Base, 3rd edn. Atomic
Dog Publishing, Cincinnati.
Turner, J.F. (1978). Housing in three dimensions: terms of reference for the
housing question redefined. World Development, 6(9):1135-1145.
UN-Habitat, (2012). Sustainable housing for sustainable cities: a policy
framework for developing countries, UN-Habitat, Nairobi.
United Nations, (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 25(1),
viewed, http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml [1 June 2016).
United Nations, (2009). The Right to Adequate Housing, Fact Sheet No.
21/Rev.1, United Nations, Geneva.
United Nations, (2012). WOMEN AND THE RIGHT TO ADEQUATE HOUSING,
United Nations, Geneva.
Van Vliet, W. (Ed.) (1998). The Encyclopaedia of Housing, Sage Publications,
Thousand Oaks, California.
Varady, P. and Preiser, E. (1998). Scattered-Site Public Housing and Housing
Satisfaction: Implications for the New Public Housing Program, Journal of
American Planning Association, 6(2): 189-207.
Varady, P., Walker, C., Wang, X., 2001. Voucher recipient achievement of
improved housing conditions in the US: do moving distance and relocation
services matter? Urban Studies 38 (8) : 1273–1305.
Vera-Toscano, E. and Ateca-Amestoy, V. (2008). The relevance of social
interactions on housing satisfaction. Social Indicators Research, 86(2):.257-
274.
102
Verster, A. (2005). The role of Inclusionary housing policy in transforming South
African cities, Housing and Urban Environment, Department of Architecture,
University of Pretoria, South Africa.
Widlock, T. (1999). Mapping Spatial and Social Permeability. Current
Anthropology. 40: 329—400.
Yin, R.K. (1994). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 2nd edn, Sage.
Thousand Oaks.
Zanuzdana, A., Khan, M. and Kraemer, A.(2013). Housing satisfaction related
to health and importance of services in urban slums: evidence from Dhaka,
Bangladesh. Social indicators research, 112(1):163-185.
103
Appendix 1: application for approval ethics in research (EiR) projects
104
Appendix 2: Information sheet and consent form
Individuals will be chosen on the basis of them being adults that are not socially or
physically vulnerable people, but are residents, government workers for or private
developers that have worked on or are situated in the Pelican Park area. The title of
this research project is:
Evaluating the impacts of State-led Relocation Projects on Beneficiaries’ Housing
Satisfactions: Pelican Park as a Case Study.
Good day, my name is Nigel Mashazhu and I am conducting research towards a
master’s degree in city and regional planning. I am researching how state relocation
housing projects impact on beneficiaries’ housing satisfaction.
I would like to invite you to participate in the project. I am interested in finding out
about how concepts such as enabling mobility, choice, economic needs and social
needs amongst others can play a role in attaining aspirations and needs of
beneficiaries. I want to understand the current status quo of Pelican Park housing
project in terms of these key concepts and I would like to interview people who
voluntarily want to be involved in the study. Please understand that you do not have
to participate, your participation is voluntary. The choice to participate is yours
alone. If you choose not to participate, there will be no negative consequence. If
you choose to participate, but wish to withdraw at any time, you will be free to do so
without negative consequence. However, I would be grateful if you would assist me
by allowing me to interview you. Will just ask you a few questions about your
experience in Pelican Park that aligns with my project in order to gain insight on
Woodstock and ideas to enable change which benefits formerly disadvantaged
individuals. It would not take longer than 2 hours. There will not be any formal
payment for your participation. You are not required to pay for anything.
If you agree to me recording the interview please
Sign here:
Your anonymity will be preserved, this recording will only be used by myself and
academic staff, if access to this information is required. In any event your name will
be replaced by a pseudonym to ensure your anonymity. Data will be kept and if you
wish to receive the outcome of the results to this study I will provide it to you after
completion.
If you agree to be a participant in the study on the basis of the above please
Sign here:
105
Appendix 3: Information sheet and consent form
106
Appendix 4: Key Informants’ Semi-structured interview questions
1. How accessible are socio-economic resources for the Pelican Park residents?
2. How permeable and legible is the layout of Pelican Park?
3. How accessible is Pelican Park to the Cape Town central business district
(CBD)?
4. Did the beneficiaries have a housing choice?
5. How are residents' needs and aspirations catered for in the design of the
settlement and in the design of individual homes?]
6. Do the housing choices cater their needs and aspirations? If it did not cater for
their needs what were the reasons for that?
7. How does the current zoning of Pelican Park enable or constrain diverse uses?
8. How does Pelican Park enable cultural diversity?
9. How is integration enabled in Pelican Park?]
10. How are Pelican Park residents using their houses for income generation
purposes? If not, what prevents them from doing so?
11. What housing-related costs did beneficiaries experience, or are still
experiencing? Are these costs manageable or not?
12. What housing subsidies are, or were, available for beneficiaries?
13. To what extent, if at all, does the beneficiaries’ housing facilitate access to
(formal) credit agreements?
14. How satisfied are residents with the size, quality and physical construction for
their home?]
15. How do the beneficiaries feel about the location of their housing?
16. What do residents think about their house design?
17. What, if any, concerns do residents have in relation to the structure of their
houses?
18. Are there any visible indications of potential structural defects?
19. To what extent, if at all, were the beneficiaries involved in the formulation and
implementation of the Pelican Park housing development project?
20. How do Pelican Park residents feel about crime in the area?
21. What influence do Pelican Park residents have has on their sense of place,
belonging and sense of community?
22. How has the goal of providing basic services to Pelican park households been
achieved?
23. How satisfied are the residents with the quality of services provided?
24. What public services do the beneficiaries have access to within walking
distance?
25. What public services do the beneficiaries require?
26. •How satisfied are residents with the social, recreational and educational
services provided in and around Pelican Park?]
27. What type of tenure is offered to Pelican Park residents? How does it impact
on their lives?
107
28. Are there any challenges to securing of tenure to improve the occupants
housing conditions?
29. What measures can be taken regarding securing tenure to induce
improvement?
30. What are the environmental challenges faced in Pelican Park?
31. Which environmental factors lead to satisfaction or dissatisfaction with
housing?